The Smoking Tire did a spotlight on this build. A few interesting details like the machined CTR flywheel replacement etc. From what I gathered it's pushing about 360hp and 330 torque in its current state. I think it's a decent build considering how young the platform is. That much power from a 1.5t is notable. I look forward to more development with the new Honda turbo motors and their new chassis platforms. Hopefully a TTV6 in the future as well. If this can be done with their smallest turbo the bigger ones should be fun.

KaySee wrote:The Smoking Tire did a spotlight on this build. A few interesting details like the machined CTR flywheel replacement etc. From what I gathered it's pushing about 360hp and 330 torque in its current state. I think it's a decent build considering how young the platform is. That much power from a 1.5t is notable. I look forward to more development with the new Honda turbo motors and their new chassis platforms. Hopefully a TTV6 in the future as well. If this can be done with their smallest turbo the bigger ones should be fun.

That guy has had a few cars on there and he seems to do a really good job.

BUT.

What is the longevity?

Notice it is running ethanol, has an upgraded Type-R turbo setup, and several other changes, and it does similarly to what the Hondata reflash on a STOCK 2.0T does?

It's great from the perspective of tuning a car and getting a lot of power, but is it really practical for most enthusiasts?

At least he seems to have fixed some of the power delivery issues which would go a long way toward making it more enjoyable. Interesting to know that the 1.5T also uses a dual mass flywheel. That is going to make clutch jobs a lot more expensive if the flywheel ever needs changed.

That guy has had a few cars on there and he seems to do a really good job.

BUT.

What is the longevity?

Notice it is running ethanol, has an upgraded Type-R turbo setup, and several other changes, and it does similarly to what the Hondata reflash on a STOCK 2.0T does?

It's great from the perspective of tuning a car and getting a lot of power, but is it really practical for most enthusiasts?

At least he seems to have fixed some of the power delivery issues which would go a long way toward making it more enjoyable. Interesting to know that the 1.5T also uses a dual mass flywheel. That is going to make clutch jobs a lot more expensive if the flywheel ever needs changed.

Hey bro, yeah longevity comes in to play for any newish powertrain configuration like this. People will be doing things to the 2.0t shortly that will put its reliability at certain power levels into question. The ceiling will be higher but it'll be the same question of time and testing. Trusted companies do as much testing as they can but time will tell in the end. The progress they've made in such short time is very promising. Ford has been running a 1.6t for years in the fiesta st and tuners have had that doing over 300 for a while. Hyundai has their own well supported 1.6t, Nissan, even fiat are running small turbos with available setups getting them above 300hp. Personally I'd put Hondas reliability in engine design above all of these brands. Just as I'd put Hondas newbie 2.0t above vw, ford etc.

Even aside from the other companies that have had their small turbos running high hp for years I'm not sure if you've heard of formula f. Honda has been racing the L15 successfully in that series for close to a decade. That also speak to the viability and durability of Hondas L series for high performance and strenuous applications. Even with the history it has time again will tell but if Ford can do it I'm confident of Honda's chances.

It is absolutely practical for all enthusiasts to get an idea of what is possible right now. I'm not sure why it would not be actually. This is just one guy's setup. The beauty of the culture is that a lot of people will come up with hundreds of different solutions. TST had an all motor 9th Gen with a k20 head and k24 bottom making about 260hp. It was like a north american 9th Gen type r. That would be a dream to drive but it also cost about 15k for his entire setup. Not practical for everyone either but you can take some of the improvements and apply that to your own build.

I was apprehensive about Honda going forced induction but seeing what people have been doing so far with just bolt ons is great. With a basic reflash you are getting at least 60 torque and 30hp more. Add some bolt ons and even on 91 octane people are getting close to 300hp to the wheels. With labour for me to get a build at that level I'd be under 3k which is amazing to me for those types of gains. If you eventually want more power there are big turbo kits going on the market now for like 1.5k with a lot of stuff included that could really escalate that further. And for the people with issues with the power delivery these options help as well. I was hearing 7k redline with no power drop off which would be nice.

So far it's impressive what is being done with such a young platform. I look forward to seeing how much further things progress. Hopefully all these engines hold together. I think new connecting rods and higher capacity clutches will be required after a certain point.

KaySee wrote:So far it's impressive what is being done with such a young platform. I look forward to seeing how much further things progress. Hopefully all these engines hold together. I think new connecting rods and higher capacity clutches will be required after a certain point.

Once you start getting into that 325-350 whp range, regardless of fuel, those little rods in the L15 become a concern. I've seen a few broken engines so far. Some because they were simply pushed way too far, others because someone put the wrong flash on or did their own tuning. In the latter case it doesn't take much hp at all to break them as its a detonation/lean issue.

I think you'd be ok in the 300 whp range on E85 for a good long time as long as you're not doing high duration/high load stuff like road racing. Even then its not going to pop as soon as you take it for a lap, but you'll wear it out much faster.

KaySee wrote:So far it's impressive what is being done with such a young platform. I look forward to seeing how much further things progress. Hopefully all these engines hold together. I think new connecting rods and higher capacity clutches will be required after a certain point.

Once you start getting into that 325-350 whp range, regardless of fuel, those little rods in the L15 become a concern. I've seen a few broken engines so far. Some because they were simply pushed way too far, others because someone put the wrong flash on or did their own tuning. In the latter case it doesn't take much hp at all to break them as its a detonation/lean issue.

I think you'd be ok in the 300 whp range on E85 for a good long time as long as you're not doing high duration/high load stuff like road racing. Even then its not going to pop as soon as you take it for a lap, but you'll wear it out much faster.

SC

Yes I was thinking something similar. One ideal set up I had in mind was about 250-290hp on 91 octane with stock internals and probably a new clutch at that point. That range should help keep things relatively stable. I haven't come across the failures you have from my experience and research but I know about 300 is attainable on standard fuel now but again I feel like 250ish and a bit more is plenty fun for what I would be doing.

It will be interesting to see what more time brings in terms of the development of the platform.

That guy has had a few cars on there and he seems to do a really good job.

BUT.

What is the longevity?

Notice it is running ethanol, has an upgraded Type-R turbo setup, and several other changes, and it does similarly to what the Hondata reflash on a STOCK 2.0T does?

It's great from the perspective of tuning a car and getting a lot of power, but is it really practical for most enthusiasts?

At least he seems to have fixed some of the power delivery issues which would go a long way toward making it more enjoyable. Interesting to know that the 1.5T also uses a dual mass flywheel. That is going to make clutch jobs a lot more expensive if the flywheel ever needs changed.

Hey bro, yeah longevity comes in to play for any newish powertrain configuration like this. People will be doing things to the 2.0t shortly that will put its reliability at certain power levels into question. The ceiling will be higher but it'll be the same question of time and testing. Trusted companies do as much testing as they can but time will tell in the end. The progress they've made in such short time is very promising. Ford has been running a 1.6t for years in the fiesta st and tuners have had that doing over 300 for a while. Hyundai has their own well supported 1.6t, Nissan, even fiat are running small turbos with available setups getting them above 300hp. Personally I'd put Hondas reliability in engine design above all of these brands. Just as I'd put Hondas newbie 2.0t above vw, ford etc.

Even aside from the other companies that have had their small turbos running high hp for years I'm not sure if you've heard of formula f. Honda has been racing the L15 successfully in that series for close to a decade. That also speak to the viability and durability of Hondas L series for high performance and strenuous applications. Even with the history it has time again will tell but if Ford can do it I'm confident of Honda's chances.

It is absolutely practical for all enthusiasts to get an idea of what is possible right now. I'm not sure why it would not be actually. This is just one guy's setup. The beauty of the culture is that a lot of people will come up with hundreds of different solutions. TST had an all motor 9th Gen with a k20 head and k24 bottom making about 260hp. It was like a north american 9th Gen type r. That would be a dream to drive but it also cost about 15k for his entire setup. Not practical for everyone either but you can take some of the improvements and apply that to your own build.

I was apprehensive about Honda going forced induction but seeing what people have been doing so far with just bolt ons is great. With a basic reflash you are getting at least 60 torque and 30hp more. Add some bolt ons and even on 91 octane people are getting close to 300hp to the wheels. With labour for me to get a build at that level I'd be under 3k which is amazing to me for those types of gains. If you eventually want more power there are big turbo kits going on the market now for like 1.5k with a lot of stuff included that could really escalate that further. And for the people with issues with the power delivery these options help as well. I was hearing 7k redline with no power drop off which would be nice.

So far it's impressive what is being done with such a young platform. I look forward to seeing how much further things progress. Hopefully all these engines hold together. I think new connecting rods and higher capacity clutches will be required after a certain point.

I've been in "the scene" for a couple of decades.

It wasn't a dig. I get wanting to modify an engine, but at some point ALL engines reach a feasible limit. That wasn't a point I tried to argue. But the problem with forced induction engines on pump gas (regardless of displacement) is that you run into the limits of the fuel pretty quickly. Especially on California pee water. This is why you are seeing builds like this running E85.

That said, I am not quite sure where the "such a young platform" comments are coming from as other boosted cars have been seeing these sorts of gains for years now and the L series is far from brand new. Even if Honda has actually redesigned everything, this engine architecture has roots in an engine that is 15 or so years old, just like the new K series engines share some basic architecture with the "old" K20.

That said, I guess my bigger point was that I see people putting some basic mods on a NEW car, but I don't see too many people wanting to pay $24K for a new Si and then wanting to put probably $10K worth of money into it while shelving any hope of warranty coverage on pretty much everything. I am all for guys figuring out what it will do, but I don't think this is indicative of what most DD, warranty considered Si's will see. So in that regard, it is a little more extreme. I was also just wondering off hand what it would do with nearly double the stock HP on a stock bottom end, since the L15 has relatively small rods, etc. Just like you don't see many 500HP APR GTI's running around...

I will say that if that tuner (can't remember the company name, NA Performance I think) builds cars that are also reliable, then he is one of the better Honda tuners I have seen in quite awhile.

That guy has had a few cars on there and he seems to do a really good job.

BUT.

What is the longevity?

Notice it is running ethanol, has an upgraded Type-R turbo setup, and several other changes, and it does similarly to what the Hondata reflash on a STOCK 2.0T does?

It's great from the perspective of tuning a car and getting a lot of power, but is it really practical for most enthusiasts?

At least he seems to have fixed some of the power delivery issues which would go a long way toward making it more enjoyable. Interesting to know that the 1.5T also uses a dual mass flywheel. That is going to make clutch jobs a lot more expensive if the flywheel ever needs changed.

Hey bro, yeah longevity comes in to play for any newish powertrain configuration like this. People will be doing things to the 2.0t shortly that will put its reliability at certain power levels into question. The ceiling will be higher but it'll be the same question of time and testing. Trusted companies do as much testing as they can but time will tell in the end. The progress they've made in such short time is very promising. Ford has been running a 1.6t for years in the fiesta st and tuners have had that doing over 300 for a while. Hyundai has their own well supported 1.6t, Nissan, even fiat are running small turbos with available setups getting them above 300hp. Personally I'd put Hondas reliability in engine design above all of these brands. Just as I'd put Hondas newbie 2.0t above vw, ford etc.

Even aside from the other companies that have had their small turbos running high hp for years I'm not sure if you've heard of formula f. Honda has been racing the L15 successfully in that series for close to a decade. That also speak to the viability and durability of Hondas L series for high performance and strenuous applications. Even with the history it has time again will tell but if Ford can do it I'm confident of Honda's chances.

It is absolutely practical for all enthusiasts to get an idea of what is possible right now. I'm not sure why it would not be actually. This is just one guy's setup. The beauty of the culture is that a lot of people will come up with hundreds of different solutions. TST had an all motor 9th Gen with a k20 head and k24 bottom making about 260hp. It was like a north american 9th Gen type r. That would be a dream to drive but it also cost about 15k for his entire setup. Not practical for everyone either but you can take some of the improvements and apply that to your own build.

I was apprehensive about Honda going forced induction but seeing what people have been doing so far with just bolt ons is great. With a basic reflash you are getting at least 60 torque and 30hp more. Add some bolt ons and even on 91 octane people are getting close to 300hp to the wheels. With labour for me to get a build at that level I'd be under 3k which is amazing to me for those types of gains. If you eventually want more power there are big turbo kits going on the market now for like 1.5k with a lot of stuff included that could really escalate that further. And for the people with issues with the power delivery these options help as well. I was hearing 7k redline with no power drop off which would be nice.

So far it's impressive what is being done with such a young platform. I look forward to seeing how much further things progress. Hopefully all these engines hold together. I think new connecting rods and higher capacity clutches will be required after a certain point.

I've been in "the scene" for a couple of decades.

It wasn't a dig. I get wanting to modify an engine, but at some point ALL engines reach a feasible limit. That wasn't a point I tried to argue. But the problem with forced induction engines on pump gas (regardless of displacement) is that you run into the limits of the fuel pretty quickly. Especially on California pee water. This is why you are seeing builds like this running E85.

That said, I am not quite sure where the "such a young platform" comments are coming from as other boosted cars have been seeing these sorts of gains for years now and the L series is far from brand new. Even if Honda has actually redesigned everything, this engine architecture has roots in an engine that is 15 or so years old, just like the new K series engines share some basic architecture with the "old" K20.

That said, I guess my bigger point was that I see people putting some basic mods on a NEW car, but I don't see too many people wanting to pay $24K for a new Si and then wanting to put probably $10K worth of money into it while shelving any hope of warranty coverage on pretty much everything. I am all for guys figuring out what it will do, but I don't think this is indicative of what most DD, warranty considered Si's will see. So in that regard, it is a little more extreme. I was also just wondering off hand what it would do with nearly double the stock HP on a stock bottom end, since the L15 has relatively small rods, etc. Just like you don't see many 500HP APR GTI's running around...

I will say that if that tuner (can't remember the company name, NA Performance I think) builds cars that are also reliable, then he is one of the better Honda tuners I have seen in quite awhile.

No dig taken man. Based on the builds I've seen so far I'd be interested in one that uses the 91-94 octane I have available which currently would be maxing out just below 300hp. If I wanted to go beyond that I'd have to modify accordingly.

In my previous post I mentioned other brands with small turbos as well. They can help guide in terms of what is possible with small boosted motors like these. I also mentioned "newish" powerplants since these motors are based of older architecture but in a completely new configuration with new technologies and forced induction. Since the new civics do indeed represent a young platform for tuners you'll see things like intercoolers, new types of ecu tunes, big turbo kits, bovs etc that you would not find on older L series based platforms. As well as suspension mods based on the new chassis with adaptive suspension tech. I found the speed in which these products were put in to place with such high quality to be notable. Even if Honda left everything the same and slapped on a turbo, quality products would require research and development for the new systems in play. The wheel hasn't been reinvented so the experience is still there. But these are new engines for companies to work with. ESPECIALLY since we are talking about factory turboed hondas. Thats a huge shift for the brand.

Even though there are thousands of people who do, I would not want to spend that kind of money on a new car as well. I'd probably be similar to what you are saying with a few easily reversible bolt ons. This build is not the average build at all. But others can learn what they want to take and leave from a car like this because these guys do decent work. Exhaust, intake, reflash, you could be looking at 50+ hp gains and 80 torque on regular 91 gas. With my previous NA cars that would have been crazy to think of. That can all be done for under 2k which is pretty reasonable. If you get inspired by this guy later on. Add a big turbo, down pipe, intercooler etc and it's cool to see what can be done.

Since the 10th Gen is two years in and the Si version is barely a year the support and development has been great for the young platform. A lot of options for people and I'm looking forward to more suspension options that work with the adaptive dampers.

That guy has had a few cars on there and he seems to do a really good job.

BUT.

What is the longevity?

Notice it is running ethanol, has an upgraded Type-R turbo setup, and several other changes, and it does similarly to what the Hondata reflash on a STOCK 2.0T does?

It's great from the perspective of tuning a car and getting a lot of power, but is it really practical for most enthusiasts?

At least he seems to have fixed some of the power delivery issues which would go a long way toward making it more enjoyable. Interesting to know that the 1.5T also uses a dual mass flywheel. That is going to make clutch jobs a lot more expensive if the flywheel ever needs changed.

Hey bro, yeah longevity comes in to play for any newish powertrain configuration like this. People will be doing things to the 2.0t shortly that will put its reliability at certain power levels into question. The ceiling will be higher but it'll be the same question of time and testing. Trusted companies do as much testing as they can but time will tell in the end. The progress they've made in such short time is very promising. Ford has been running a 1.6t for years in the fiesta st and tuners have had that doing over 300 for a while. Hyundai has their own well supported 1.6t, Nissan, even fiat are running small turbos with available setups getting them above 300hp. Personally I'd put Hondas reliability in engine design above all of these brands. Just as I'd put Hondas newbie 2.0t above vw, ford etc.

Even aside from the other companies that have had their small turbos running high hp for years I'm not sure if you've heard of formula f. Honda has been racing the L15 successfully in that series for close to a decade. That also speak to the viability and durability of Hondas L series for high performance and strenuous applications. Even with the history it has time again will tell but if Ford can do it I'm confident of Honda's chances.

It is absolutely practical for all enthusiasts to get an idea of what is possible right now. I'm not sure why it would not be actually. This is just one guy's setup. The beauty of the culture is that a lot of people will come up with hundreds of different solutions. TST had an all motor 9th Gen with a k20 head and k24 bottom making about 260hp. It was like a north american 9th Gen type r. That would be a dream to drive but it also cost about 15k for his entire setup. Not practical for everyone either but you can take some of the improvements and apply that to your own build.

I was apprehensive about Honda going forced induction but seeing what people have been doing so far with just bolt ons is great. With a basic reflash you are getting at least 60 torque and 30hp more. Add some bolt ons and even on 91 octane people are getting close to 300hp to the wheels. With labour for me to get a build at that level I'd be under 3k which is amazing to me for those types of gains. If you eventually want more power there are big turbo kits going on the market now for like 1.5k with a lot of stuff included that could really escalate that further. And for the people with issues with the power delivery these options help as well. I was hearing 7k redline with no power drop off which would be nice.

So far it's impressive what is being done with such a young platform. I look forward to seeing how much further things progress. Hopefully all these engines hold together. I think new connecting rods and higher capacity clutches will be required after a certain point.

I've been in "the scene" for a couple of decades.

It wasn't a dig. I get wanting to modify an engine, but at some point ALL engines reach a feasible limit. That wasn't a point I tried to argue. But the problem with forced induction engines on pump gas (regardless of displacement) is that you run into the limits of the fuel pretty quickly. Especially on California pee water. This is why you are seeing builds like this running E85.

That said, I am not quite sure where the "such a young platform" comments are coming from as other boosted cars have been seeing these sorts of gains for years now and the L series is far from brand new. Even if Honda has actually redesigned everything, this engine architecture has roots in an engine that is 15 or so years old, just like the new K series engines share some basic architecture with the "old" K20.

That said, I guess my bigger point was that I see people putting some basic mods on a NEW car, but I don't see too many people wanting to pay $24K for a new Si and then wanting to put probably $10K worth of money into it while shelving any hope of warranty coverage on pretty much everything. I am all for guys figuring out what it will do, but I don't think this is indicative of what most DD, warranty considered Si's will see. So in that regard, it is a little more extreme. I was also just wondering off hand what it would do with nearly double the stock HP on a stock bottom end, since the L15 has relatively small rods, etc. Just like you don't see many 500HP APR GTI's running around...

I will say that if that tuner (can't remember the company name, NA Performance I think) builds cars that are also reliable, then he is one of the better Honda tuners I have seen in quite awhile.

No dig taken man. Based on the builds I've seen so far I'd be interested in one that uses the 91-94 octane I have available which currently would be maxing out just below 300hp. If I wanted to go beyond that I'd have to modify accordingly.

In my previous post I mentioned other brands with small turbos as well. They can help guide in terms of what is possible with small boosted motors like these. I also mentioned "newish" powerplants since these motors are based of older architecture but in a completely new configuration with new technologies and forced induction. Since the new civics do indeed represent a young platform for tuners you'll see things like intercoolers, new types of ecu tunes, big turbo kits, bovs etc that you would not find on older L series based platforms. As well as suspension mods based on the new chassis with adaptive suspension tech. I found the speed in which these products were put in to place with such high quality to be notable. Even if Honda left everything the same and slapped on a turbo, quality products would require research and development for the new systems in play. The wheel hasn't been reinvented so the experience is still there. But these are new engines for companies to work with. ESPECIALLY since we are talking about factory turboed hondas. Thats a huge shift for the brand.

Even though there are thousands of people who do, I would not want to spend that kind of money on a new car as well. I'd probably be similar to what you are saying with a few easily reversible bolt ons. This build is not the average build at all. But others can learn what they want to take and leave from a car like this because these guys do decent work. Exhaust, intake, reflash, you could be looking at 50+ hp gains and 80 torque on regular 91 gas. With my previous NA cars that would have been crazy to think of. That can all be done for under 2k which is pretty reasonable. If you get inspired by this guy later on. Add a big turbo, down pipe, intercooler etc and it's cool to see what can be done.

Since the 10th Gen is two years in and the Si version is barely a year the support and development has been great for the young platform. A lot of options for people and I'm looking forward to more suspension options that work with the adaptive dampers.

I guess you don't really remember the older Si's (especially the 8th gen) when a lot of this type of stuff was available from day 1. It is good to see people developing stuff for the new Si, but IMO, compared to the rest of the aftermarket, it isn't an incredible pace.

I guess you don't really remember the older Si's (especially the 8th gen) when a lot of this type of stuff was available from day 1. It is good to see people developing stuff for the new Si, but IMO, compared to the rest of the aftermarket, it isn't an incredible pace.

Really? That's interesting, seems like the RSX Type-S that was out 4 years before the eighth gen civic using variants of the K20A and Z that the Civic Si was using might have has something to do with that. That could have slipped your mind though.

I'm curious to hear from people with actual experience as well. Shawn, Jeff and whoever else wants to chime in. For Honda's first mass deployment of standard and performance oriented VTC Turbo and VTEC Turbo direct injection engines how do you feel the after market response has been? The amount of products out there for Honda's huge shift to forced induction seems pretty robust for the CTR, Si and other turbo models in this short amount of time. I still feel they are lagging a bit with suspension options for adaptive dampers but there are options out there, and the platform is still fresh once again. If it's a slow pace to have people running 11 second civic Sis within the first 4-6 months of release, I'd love to see what a fast pace looks like.

Was going from the B series to the K series a day 1 flip of the switch and the market was flooded with dedicated parts for the motors? No one had to do any R and D before more items became refined and ready for market?

I guess you don't really remember the older Si's (especially the 8th gen) when a lot of this type of stuff was available from day 1. It is good to see people developing stuff for the new Si, but IMO, compared to the rest of the aftermarket, it isn't an incredible pace.

Really? That's interesting, seems like the RSX Type-S that was out 4 years before the eighth gen civic using variants of the K20A and Z that the Civic Si was using might have has something to do with that. That could have slipped your mind though.

I'm curious to hear from people with actual experience as well. Shawn, Jeff and whoever else wants to chime in. For Honda's first mass deployment of standard and performance oriented VTC Turbo and VTEC Turbo direct injection engines how do you feel the after market response has been? The amount of products out there for Honda's huge shift to forced induction seems pretty robust for the CTR, Si and other turbo models in this short amount of time. I still feel they are lagging a bit with suspension options for adaptive dampers but there are options out there, and the platform is still fresh once again. If it's a slow pace to have people running 11 second civic Sis within the first 4-6 months of release, I'd love to see what a fast pace looks like.

Was going from the B series to the K series a day 1 flip of the switch and the market was flooded with dedicated parts for the motors? No one had to do any R and D before more items became refined and ready for market?

Now you are just being antagonistic.

1) The RSX had an engine that was similar, yet substantially different. The intake manifolds were different, ECU schemes were different, transmission mounting point and block mounting points were also all substantially different. The Si had balance shafts, a different intake manifold, and IIRC a higher compression ratio. More importantly, no ancillaries were the same. Not intakes, headers, exhausts, ECU's, etc. Further, suspensions were 100% different with the RSX featuring the high mount steering rack and the Si not. Rear suspensions were different, etc. And yet, on day 1 there were numerous suspensions available, intakes, headers, exhausts, etc. By this point in the 8th gen's run, the engines were passing 300WHP NA, they were competing in amateur racing series, and you could modify just about any component on the car, with nearly all major vendors producing pretty much all of their product lines for the car. Kits like the Kraftwerks may have even been getting close by this point.

That said, Honda rightfully put the cars out there for the aftermarket to develop stuff, but the more important part of that was that DEMAND for the car was so high that it made it justifiable.

And yes, the pace of development for the RSX-S was also very rapid as was the pace for the B16 Civic Si.

But back then, pretty much NOTHING on the street was running 11's, so to use that as a benchmark is incorrect. They WERE seeing relatively large HP gains and they were developed rapidly. You are also partly correct in that they shared SOME componentry with the RSX, but not enough to where much of the stuff would just bolt across. Some was sharable, a lot was not.

1) The RSX had an engine that was similar, yet substantially different. The intake manifolds were different, ECU schemes were different, transmission mounting point and block mounting points were also all substantially different. The Si had balance shafts, a different intake manifold, and IIRC a higher compression ratio. More importantly, no ancillaries were the same. Not intakes, headers, exhausts, ECU's, etc. Further, suspensions were 100% different with the RSX featuring the high mount steering rack and the Si not. Rear suspensions were different, etc. And yet, on day 1 there were numerous suspensions available, intakes, headers, exhausts, etc. By this point in the 8th gen's run, the engines were passing 300WHP NA, they were competing in amateur racing series, and you could modify just about any component on the car, with nearly all major vendors producing pretty much all of their product lines for the car. Kits like the Kraftwerks may have even been getting close by this point.

That said, Honda rightfully put the cars out there for the aftermarket to develop stuff, but the more important part of that was that DEMAND for the car was so high that it made it justifiable.

And yes, the pace of development for the RSX-S was also very rapid as was the pace for the B16 Civic Si.

But back then, pretty much NOTHING on the street was running 11's, so to use that as a benchmark is incorrect. They WERE seeing relatively large HP gains and they were developed rapidly. You are also partly correct in that they shared SOME componentry with the RSX, but not enough to where much of the stuff would just bolt across. Some was sharable, a lot was not.

I'm just responding to you bud. Nothing more.

Interesting statements here so I just want to make sure I'm clear. You were quick to point out that the L series in the Si is based on 15 year old architecture and really downplay it's relative changes for the specific configuration. Then later you make sure to highlight all the changes in the K20 from the RSX S to the 8th Si. You point out differences in the K20 but stress similarities in the L15s. From my end I'd like to ask from your understanding which two motors are more similar? The K20s from the 2002 RSX S and 2006 Civic Si. Or the L15s from the 2015 Fit and the 2017 Civic Si. That would help me understand your thought process better.

Can anyone else confirm that the first day the RSX S was on sale, manufacturers had completed development of dedicated parts for the new K20? Headers, cat backs, ECU tunes, intakes were ready to install the day the first example was sold from a dealer? I always thought that testing was required and companies used mules to make sure parts fit and worked to spec. But if there was that type of turnaround time back then for specific parts for that motor coming from the B series that is very impressive. Owe, are you able to explain how these parts were developed and manufacturedand ready to buy before the new platform even came out? I honestly am curious and I wonder why companies like hondata, ktuner, greddy, aFe, tein have to take months now to develop products specifically for the highly sought after CTR, very successful standard civic turbos, and the poor selling yet performance oriented civic si.

I clearly remember nice builds in the 90s with DX hatches running 12s, 11s and 10s with swapped motors and tons of other mods. But you shouldn't be focusing on the 11 second time itself. The point is how quickly the car developed to post impressive times for the era it's in. If that translates to 13 seconds or whatever that is not the point. It's the progress that was made to get to a high level in a short time.

In your opinion the progress being made with the current Si isn't impressive and compare it to the 8th Gen at this time. I can say that the current Si is fielded in amateur races right now. Some with the ctr crate motor which is frickin ' sweet and some with hotter L engines. You can mod pretty much anything you want on the car as of now. Big brands have a range of parts available, big brake kits, strut bars, exhausts etc. From Greddy, buddy club stop tech, borla, afe, tein and so on. PRL has been running a 400+ hp Si strong for a few months now. 1.5 liters! Just hilarious stuff being done. I'm actually not sure what is not available for this car right now. So seems fairly comparable to the more successful 8th Gen in terms of support. Even if it's not comparable there is so much stuff out there right now you can really create a beast if you want. Seems like a good start to me by most metrics. But I look forward to your insight about the day one support not based on previous development and made specifically for a certain car. That could change how I view this progress for sure.

Also please try to trim your responses. I try to when I can to keep it a bit easier to read.

Also, did the Fit have much of an aftermarket anyway? I have not looked into that car at all ever. But I should have spaced the years with the same increment to give tuners the same development time. So at 4 years you could compare the 2013 Fit L15 to the 2017 Civic Si L15 to keep things equal in terms of time.

1) The RSX had an engine that was similar, yet substantially different. The intake manifolds were different, ECU schemes were different, transmission mounting point and block mounting points were also all substantially different. The Si had balance shafts, a different intake manifold, and IIRC a higher compression ratio. More importantly, no ancillaries were the same. Not intakes, headers, exhausts, ECU's, etc. Further, suspensions were 100% different with the RSX featuring the high mount steering rack and the Si not. Rear suspensions were different, etc. And yet, on day 1 there were numerous suspensions available, intakes, headers, exhausts, etc. By this point in the 8th gen's run, the engines were passing 300WHP NA, they were competing in amateur racing series, and you could modify just about any component on the car, with nearly all major vendors producing pretty much all of their product lines for the car. Kits like the Kraftwerks may have even been getting close by this point.

That said, Honda rightfully put the cars out there for the aftermarket to develop stuff, but the more important part of that was that DEMAND for the car was so high that it made it justifiable.

And yes, the pace of development for the RSX-S was also very rapid as was the pace for the B16 Civic Si.

But back then, pretty much NOTHING on the street was running 11's, so to use that as a benchmark is incorrect. They WERE seeing relatively large HP gains and they were developed rapidly. You are also partly correct in that they shared SOME componentry with the RSX, but not enough to where much of the stuff would just bolt across. Some was sharable, a lot was not.

I'm just responding to you bud. Nothing more.

Interesting statements here so I just want to make sure I'm clear. You were quick to point out that the L series in the Si is based on 15 year old architecture and really downplay it's relative changes for the specific configuration. Then later you make sure to highlight all the changes in the K20 from the RSX S to the 8th Si. You point out differences in the K20 but stress similarities in the L15s. From my end I'd like to ask from your understanding which two motors are more similar? The K20s from the 2002 RSX S and 2006 Civic Si. Or the L15s from the 2015 Fit and the 2017 Civic Si. That would help me understand your thought process better.

Can anyone else confirm that the first day the RSX S was on sale, manufacturers had completed development of dedicated parts for the new K20? Headers, cat backs, ECU tunes, intakes were ready to install the day the first example was sold from a dealer? I always thought that testing was required and companies used mules to make sure parts fit and worked to spec. But if there was that type of turnaround time back then for specific parts for that motor coming from the B series that is very impressive. Owe, are you able to explain how these parts were developed and manufacturedand ready to buy before the new platform even came out? I honestly am curious and I wonder why companies like hondata, ktuner, greddy, aFe, tein have to take months now to develop products specifically for the highly sought after CTR, very successful standard civic turbos, and the poor selling yet performance oriented civic si.

I clearly remember nice builds in the 90s with DX hatches running 12s, 11s and 10s with swapped motors and tons of other mods. But you shouldn't be focusing on the 11 second time itself. The point is how quickly the car developed to post impressive times for the era it's in. If that translates to 13 seconds or whatever that is not the point. It's the progress that was made to get to a high level in a short time.

In your opinion the progress being made with the current Si isn't impressive and compare it to the 8th Gen at this time. I can say that the current Si is fielded in amateur races right now. Some with the ctr crate motor which is frickin ' sweet and some with hotter L engines. You can mod pretty much anything you want on the car as of now. Big brands have a range of parts available, big brake kits, strut bars, exhausts etc. From Greddy, buddy club stop tech, borla, afe, tein and so on. PRL has been running a 400+ hp Si strong for a few months now. 1.5 liters! Just hilarious stuff being done. I'm actually not sure what is not available for this car right now. So seems fairly comparable to the more successful 8th Gen in terms of support. Even if it's not comparable there is so much stuff out there right now you can really create a beast if you want. Seems like a good start to me by most metrics. But I look forward to your insight about the day one support not based on previous development and made specifically for a certain car. That could change how I view this progress for sure.

Also please try to trim your responses. I try to when I can to keep it a bit easier to read.

Your really off the plot now bud.

1) I didn't say the 2 K20's didn't share similarities. I DID say that they were different enough that RSX stuff didn't work on the Si, which means that everything had to be redeveloped. That said, yes, both engines DID have similar architecture and they have similar architecture to the K20T that is now in the Accord and Type-R.

However, you have missed the entire point, which is that A) neither engine is a clean sheet design and B) they BOTH share fundamental architectural features with the donor, which doesn't mean they are "the same."

But here is the IMPORTANT part. Being based on a 1.5L economy engine with its roots in the Fit, which was designed for low cost, economy and emissions, it is a long stroke, small bore engine with relatively small rods. *Reference Shawn's statement about pushing it much beyond 300WHP on stock rods.

The K20 has much more suitable dimensions for more HP, which becomes important as you add HP.

2) If you don't believe me, go take a look at TOV's project Si, which was actually a pre-production car with full bolt-ons on it. No need to look any further than this site.

3) I'm curious which 10 and 11 second streetable Hondas you are talking about from the 90's. There weren't many around in those days that were streetable, let alone daily drivable. In fact, I went and did some searching about guys like Ed Bergenholtz and Stephan Papadakis. Those were the good days of import drag racing, and I am happy to see that "grassroots" drive returning to the sport.

4) In "my opinion" you are correct. The Honda aftermarket just is nothing like it used to be.

That said, the way Honda got faster development with cars like the 8th gen was actually really simple. They gave a bunch of pre-production prototype cars to the various aftermarket companies and let them develop parts BEFORE the car went on sale or was available in large numbers.

5) As for my statements about the cars being raced, etc, I didn't say the new car wasn't raced. But suffice it to say, there is just not the level of interest that existed before Honda stagnated their STOCK level of performance. The last Si to make a major move forward was the 8th gen and their enthusiast interest has suffered as a result. There seems to be good interest in the Type-R, so hopefully, the car guys in Honda will start to win more battles.

That said, I wasn't disputing the coolness of modifying cars. I was simply saying that I don't think I would comfortable pushing an L15 that hard, just like I would be hesitant to boost a lot of Honda engines that much. The downside is that being a small engine with small rods, you can only do so much before your reliability curve starts to drop significantly.

1) The RSX had an engine that was similar, yet substantially different. The intake manifolds were different, ECU schemes were different, transmission mounting point and block mounting points were also all substantially different. The Si had balance shafts, a different intake manifold, and IIRC a higher compression ratio. More importantly, no ancillaries were the same. Not intakes, headers, exhausts, ECU's, etc. Further, suspensions were 100% different with the RSX featuring the high mount steering rack and the Si not. Rear suspensions were different, etc. And yet, on day 1 there were numerous suspensions available, intakes, headers, exhausts, etc. By this point in the 8th gen's run, the engines were passing 300WHP NA, they were competing in amateur racing series, and you could modify just about any component on the car, with nearly all major vendors producing pretty much all of their product lines for the car. Kits like the Kraftwerks may have even been getting close by this point.

That said, Honda rightfully put the cars out there for the aftermarket to develop stuff, but the more important part of that was that DEMAND for the car was so high that it made it justifiable.

And yes, the pace of development for the RSX-S was also very rapid as was the pace for the B16 Civic Si.

But back then, pretty much NOTHING on the street was running 11's, so to use that as a benchmark is incorrect. They WERE seeing relatively large HP gains and they were developed rapidly. You are also partly correct in that they shared SOME componentry with the RSX, but not enough to where much of the stuff would just bolt across. Some was sharable, a lot was not.

I'm just responding to you bud. Nothing more.

Interesting statements here so I just want to make sure I'm clear. You were quick to point out that the L series in the Si is based on 15 year old architecture and really downplay it's relative changes for the specific configuration. Then later you make sure to highlight all the changes in the K20 from the RSX S to the 8th Si. You point out differences in the K20 but stress similarities in the L15s. From my end I'd like to ask from your understanding which two motors are more similar? The K20s from the 2002 RSX S and 2006 Civic Si. Or the L15s from the 2015 Fit and the 2017 Civic Si. That would help me understand your thought process better.

Can anyone else confirm that the first day the RSX S was on sale, manufacturers had completed development of dedicated parts for the new K20? Headers, cat backs, ECU tunes, intakes were ready to install the day the first example was sold from a dealer? I always thought that testing was required and companies used mules to make sure parts fit and worked to spec. But if there was that type of turnaround time back then for specific parts for that motor coming from the B series that is very impressive. Owe, are you able to explain how these parts were developed and manufacturedand ready to buy before the new platform even came out? I honestly am curious and I wonder why companies like hondata, ktuner, greddy, aFe, tein have to take months now to develop products specifically for the highly sought after CTR, very successful standard civic turbos, and the poor selling yet performance oriented civic si.

I clearly remember nice builds in the 90s with DX hatches running 12s, 11s and 10s with swapped motors and tons of other mods. But you shouldn't be focusing on the 11 second time itself. The point is how quickly the car developed to post impressive times for the era it's in. If that translates to 13 seconds or whatever that is not the point. It's the progress that was made to get to a high level in a short time.

In your opinion the progress being made with the current Si isn't impressive and compare it to the 8th Gen at this time. I can say that the current Si is fielded in amateur races right now. Some with the ctr crate motor which is frickin ' sweet and some with hotter L engines. You can mod pretty much anything you want on the car as of now. Big brands have a range of parts available, big brake kits, strut bars, exhausts etc. From Greddy, buddy club stop tech, borla, afe, tein and so on. PRL has been running a 400+ hp Si strong for a few months now. 1.5 liters! Just hilarious stuff being done. I'm actually not sure what is not available for this car right now. So seems fairly comparable to the more successful 8th Gen in terms of support. Even if it's not comparable there is so much stuff out there right now you can really create a beast if you want. Seems like a good start to me by most metrics. But I look forward to your insight about the day one support not based on previous development and made specifically for a certain car. That could change how I view this progress for sure.

Also please try to trim your responses. I try to when I can to keep it a bit easier to read.

Your really off the plot now bud.

1) I didn't say the 2 K20's didn't share similarities. I DID say that they were different enough that RSX stuff didn't work on the Si, which means that everything had to be redeveloped. That said, yes, both engines DID have similar architecture and they have similar architecture to the K20T that is now in the Accord and Type-R.

However, you have missed the entire point, which is that A) neither engine is a clean sheet design and B) they BOTH share fundamental architectural features with the donor, which doesn't mean they are "the same."

But here is the IMPORTANT part. Being based on a 1.5L economy engine with its roots in the Fit, which was designed for low cost, economy and emissions, it is a long stroke, small bore engine with relatively small rods. *Reference Shawn's statement about pushing it much beyond 300WHP on stock rods.

The K20 has much more suitable dimensions for more HP, which becomes important as you add HP.

2) If you don't believe me, go take a look at TOV's project Si, which was actually a pre-production car with full bolt-ons on it. No need to look any further than this site.

3) I'm curious which 10 and 11 second streetable Hondas you are talking about from the 90's. There weren't many around in those days that were streetable, let alone daily drivable. In fact, I went and did some searching about guys like Ed Bergenholtz and Stephan Papadakis. Those were the good days of import drag racing, and I am happy to see that "grassroots" drive returning to the sport.

4) In "my opinion" you are correct. The Honda aftermarket just is nothing like it used to be.

That said, the way Honda got faster development with cars like the 8th gen was actually really simple. They gave a bunch of pre-production prototype cars to the various aftermarket companies and let them develop parts BEFORE the car went on sale or was available in large numbers.

5) As for my statements about the cars being raced, etc, I didn't say the new car wasn't raced. But suffice it to say, there is just not the level of interest that existed before Honda stagnated their STOCK level of performance. The last Si to make a major move forward was the 8th gen and their enthusiast interest has suffered as a result. There seems to be good interest in the Type-R, so hopefully, the car guys in Honda will start to win more battles.

That said, I wasn't disputing the coolness of modifying cars. I was simply saying that I don't think I would comfortable pushing an L15 that hard, just like I would be hesitant to boost a lot of Honda engines that much. The downside is that being a small engine with small rods, you can only do so much before your reliability curve starts to drop significantly.

Hey brochacho.

No, I didn't miss anything, I actually just asked you which set of engines you thought were more similar. The K20 in the 2002 RSX vs the 2006 Si or the L in a 2013 Fit vs a 2017 Si. You haven't responded so you must have missed that.

And that response was what I was waiting for! A preproduction mule was sent out. Thats what I was thinking but I didn't want to say anything first.
Yes totally makes sense why they'd have parts day one then. Did Honda send those to every big name company back then? How ahead of time did they get them? How long did it take for the peeps who didn't get early cars to catch up? I don't recall seeing a program like that for the turbo k20 and l15 based cars this time around. I think it is more accurate to compare progress of companies that received the cars at the same time. Looks like Honda may not be sending stuff ahead of time like they did in the past. Even back then, were they sending them to all the companies or just a select few. Seems pretty expensive considering all the tuners out there but those were the good ol ' days. In the end that means the day one stuff was based on Honda having that kind of program available for tuners. Not only the overall support. Seems like people are working very quickly with less support from the oem this time around which speaks to their enthusiasm at least.

There are articles out there about civics running 10-12s in the 90s. But maybe they were not street able as you say. I don't really care enough to do the searching for you but again the actual times didn't matter. If 11 seconds is impressive now just go by what was impressive then in the 2000s. This first factory boosted Si was doing impressive times without preproduction support in under 5 months. That seems good to me. How long did it take development to get equivalent impressive times for previous gens? It is easier to get gains than NA. But this is also a terrible economy based engine so it's pretty neat to see it cracking 11s.

There's actually a lot of interest in the Si strangely enough as well. Despite its reception and the tears shed there is a lot of kit out there for it. Type R development is still catching up at this point and I believe the fastest 10th Gen is still an Si or a 1.5t civic at this point. There could be a quicker CTR by now but I haven't seen it posted as yet. The Si has had more development time as there was sadly no day one blessings for the CTR either. The CTR will surpass it soon enough, but despite your disdain for the Si platform there is more than enough interest to make the cars really quick, or whatever your goals are. These are all good things for people who enjoy driving Hondas.

Especially for a new car that I daily I would be in a similar boat as you I would not want to push the car too hard. As I said, this type of build isn't for everyone, but it is cool to see what is being done at this point especially without the preproduction support of the past.

1) The RSX had an engine that was similar, yet substantially different. The intake manifolds were different, ECU schemes were different, transmission mounting point and block mounting points were also all substantially different. The Si had balance shafts, a different intake manifold, and IIRC a higher compression ratio. More importantly, no ancillaries were the same. Not intakes, headers, exhausts, ECU's, etc. Further, suspensions were 100% different with the RSX featuring the high mount steering rack and the Si not. Rear suspensions were different, etc. And yet, on day 1 there were numerous suspensions available, intakes, headers, exhausts, etc. By this point in the 8th gen's run, the engines were passing 300WHP NA, they were competing in amateur racing series, and you could modify just about any component on the car, with nearly all major vendors producing pretty much all of their product lines for the car. Kits like the Kraftwerks may have even been getting close by this point.

That said, Honda rightfully put the cars out there for the aftermarket to develop stuff, but the more important part of that was that DEMAND for the car was so high that it made it justifiable.

And yes, the pace of development for the RSX-S was also very rapid as was the pace for the B16 Civic Si.

But back then, pretty much NOTHING on the street was running 11's, so to use that as a benchmark is incorrect. They WERE seeing relatively large HP gains and they were developed rapidly. You are also partly correct in that they shared SOME componentry with the RSX, but not enough to where much of the stuff would just bolt across. Some was sharable, a lot was not.

I'm just responding to you bud. Nothing more.

Interesting statements here so I just want to make sure I'm clear. You were quick to point out that the L series in the Si is based on 15 year old architecture and really downplay it's relative changes for the specific configuration. Then later you make sure to highlight all the changes in the K20 from the RSX S to the 8th Si. You point out differences in the K20 but stress similarities in the L15s. From my end I'd like to ask from your understanding which two motors are more similar? The K20s from the 2002 RSX S and 2006 Civic Si. Or the L15s from the 2015 Fit and the 2017 Civic Si. That would help me understand your thought process better.

Can anyone else confirm that the first day the RSX S was on sale, manufacturers had completed development of dedicated parts for the new K20? Headers, cat backs, ECU tunes, intakes were ready to install the day the first example was sold from a dealer? I always thought that testing was required and companies used mules to make sure parts fit and worked to spec. But if there was that type of turnaround time back then for specific parts for that motor coming from the B series that is very impressive. Owe, are you able to explain how these parts were developed and manufacturedand ready to buy before the new platform even came out? I honestly am curious and I wonder why companies like hondata, ktuner, greddy, aFe, tein have to take months now to develop products specifically for the highly sought after CTR, very successful standard civic turbos, and the poor selling yet performance oriented civic si.

I clearly remember nice builds in the 90s with DX hatches running 12s, 11s and 10s with swapped motors and tons of other mods. But you shouldn't be focusing on the 11 second time itself. The point is how quickly the car developed to post impressive times for the era it's in. If that translates to 13 seconds or whatever that is not the point. It's the progress that was made to get to a high level in a short time.

In your opinion the progress being made with the current Si isn't impressive and compare it to the 8th Gen at this time. I can say that the current Si is fielded in amateur races right now. Some with the ctr crate motor which is frickin ' sweet and some with hotter L engines. You can mod pretty much anything you want on the car as of now. Big brands have a range of parts available, big brake kits, strut bars, exhausts etc. From Greddy, buddy club stop tech, borla, afe, tein and so on. PRL has been running a 400+ hp Si strong for a few months now. 1.5 liters! Just hilarious stuff being done. I'm actually not sure what is not available for this car right now. So seems fairly comparable to the more successful 8th Gen in terms of support. Even if it's not comparable there is so much stuff out there right now you can really create a beast if you want. Seems like a good start to me by most metrics. But I look forward to your insight about the day one support not based on previous development and made specifically for a certain car. That could change how I view this progress for sure.

Also please try to trim your responses. I try to when I can to keep it a bit easier to read.

Your really off the plot now bud.

1) I didn't say the 2 K20's didn't share similarities. I DID say that they were different enough that RSX stuff didn't work on the Si, which means that everything had to be redeveloped. That said, yes, both engines DID have similar architecture and they have similar architecture to the K20T that is now in the Accord and Type-R.

However, you have missed the entire point, which is that A) neither engine is a clean sheet design and B) they BOTH share fundamental architectural features with the donor, which doesn't mean they are "the same."

But here is the IMPORTANT part. Being based on a 1.5L economy engine with its roots in the Fit, which was designed for low cost, economy and emissions, it is a long stroke, small bore engine with relatively small rods. *Reference Shawn's statement about pushing it much beyond 300WHP on stock rods.

The K20 has much more suitable dimensions for more HP, which becomes important as you add HP.

2) If you don't believe me, go take a look at TOV's project Si, which was actually a pre-production car with full bolt-ons on it. No need to look any further than this site.

3) I'm curious which 10 and 11 second streetable Hondas you are talking about from the 90's. There weren't many around in those days that were streetable, let alone daily drivable. In fact, I went and did some searching about guys like Ed Bergenholtz and Stephan Papadakis. Those were the good days of import drag racing, and I am happy to see that "grassroots" drive returning to the sport.

4) In "my opinion" you are correct. The Honda aftermarket just is nothing like it used to be.

That said, the way Honda got faster development with cars like the 8th gen was actually really simple. They gave a bunch of pre-production prototype cars to the various aftermarket companies and let them develop parts BEFORE the car went on sale or was available in large numbers.

5) As for my statements about the cars being raced, etc, I didn't say the new car wasn't raced. But suffice it to say, there is just not the level of interest that existed before Honda stagnated their STOCK level of performance. The last Si to make a major move forward was the 8th gen and their enthusiast interest has suffered as a result. There seems to be good interest in the Type-R, so hopefully, the car guys in Honda will start to win more battles.

That said, I wasn't disputing the coolness of modifying cars. I was simply saying that I don't think I would comfortable pushing an L15 that hard, just like I would be hesitant to boost a lot of Honda engines that much. The downside is that being a small engine with small rods, you can only do so much before your reliability curve starts to drop significantly.

Hey brochacho.

No, I didn't miss anything, I actually just asked you which set of engines you thought were more similar. The K20 in the 2002 RSX vs the 2006 Si or the L in a 2013 Fit vs a 2017 Si. You haven't responded so you must have missed that.

And that response was what I was waiting for! A preproduction mule was sent out. Thats what I was thinking but I didn't want to say anything first.
Yes totally makes sense why they'd have parts day one then. Did Honda send those to every big name company back then? How ahead of time did they get them? How long did it take for the peeps who didn't get early cars to catch up? I don't recall seeing a program like that for the turbo k20 and l15 based cars this time around. I think it is more accurate to compare progress of companies that received the cars at the same time. Looks like Honda may not be sending stuff ahead of time like they did in the past. Even back then, were they sending them to all the companies or just a select few. Seems pretty expensive considering all the tuners out there but those were the good ol ' days. In the end that means the day one stuff was based on Honda having that kind of program available for tuners. Not only the overall support. Seems like people are working very quickly with less support from the oem this time around which speaks to their enthusiasm at least.

There are articles out there about civics running 10-12s in the 90s. But maybe they were not street able as you say. I don't really care enough to do the searching for you but again the actual times didn't matter. If 11 seconds is impressive now just go by what was impressive then in the 2000s. This first factory boosted Si was doing impressive times without preproduction support in under 5 months. That seems good to me. How long did it take development to get equivalent impressive times for previous gens? It is easier to get gains than NA. But this is also a terrible economy based engine so it's pretty neat to see it cracking 11s.

There's actually a lot of interest in the Si strangely enough as well. Despite its reception and the tears shed there is a lot of kit out there for it. Type R development is still catching up at this point and I believe the fastest 10th Gen is still an Si or a 1.5t civic at this point. There could be a quicker CTR by now but I haven't seen it posted as yet. The Si has had more development time as there was sadly no day one blessings for the CTR either. The CTR will surpass it soon enough, but despite your disdain for the Si platform there is more than enough interest to make the cars really quick, or whatever your goals are. These are all good things for people who enjoy driving Hondas.

Especially for a new car that I daily I would be in a similar boat as you I would not want to push the car too hard. As I said, this type of build isn't for everyone, but it is cool to see what is being done at this point especially without the preproduction support of the past.

Yeah brosef

It doesn't have nearly as much interest as you wish, which is why Honda was just blowing them out again for a $200 a month lease. That was about 2 weeks ago.

That said, I wasn't the one that tried to claim that the Si and the RSX were identical and that parts could bolt across (some could, some couldn't, just like the 2017 Si and the Fit).

As for the Si, I don't have disdain for the platform. I have disdain for the powertrain. Huge difference. But then again, consider the level of mods on the car in this video to get to 360HP... And like I said before, how durable will it be?

P.S. No research on the 90's drag racing scene needed. I was around for it. I also have TONS of magazines from that time period. Good days for import drag racing for sure.

1) The RSX had an engine that was similar, yet substantially different. The intake manifolds were different, ECU schemes were different, transmission mounting point and block mounting points were also all substantially different. The Si had balance shafts, a different intake manifold, and IIRC a higher compression ratio. More importantly, no ancillaries were the same. Not intakes, headers, exhausts, ECU's, etc. Further, suspensions were 100% different with the RSX featuring the high mount steering rack and the Si not. Rear suspensions were different, etc. And yet, on day 1 there were numerous suspensions available, intakes, headers, exhausts, etc. By this point in the 8th gen's run, the engines were passing 300WHP NA, they were competing in amateur racing series, and you could modify just about any component on the car, with nearly all major vendors producing pretty much all of their product lines for the car. Kits like the Kraftwerks may have even been getting close by this point.

That said, Honda rightfully put the cars out there for the aftermarket to develop stuff, but the more important part of that was that DEMAND for the car was so high that it made it justifiable.

And yes, the pace of development for the RSX-S was also very rapid as was the pace for the B16 Civic Si.

But back then, pretty much NOTHING on the street was running 11's, so to use that as a benchmark is incorrect. They WERE seeing relatively large HP gains and they were developed rapidly. You are also partly correct in that they shared SOME componentry with the RSX, but not enough to where much of the stuff would just bolt across. Some was sharable, a lot was not.

I'm just responding to you bud. Nothing more.

Interesting statements here so I just want to make sure I'm clear. You were quick to point out that the L series in the Si is based on 15 year old architecture and really downplay it's relative changes for the specific configuration. Then later you make sure to highlight all the changes in the K20 from the RSX S to the 8th Si. You point out differences in the K20 but stress similarities in the L15s. From my end I'd like to ask from your understanding which two motors are more similar? The K20s from the 2002 RSX S and 2006 Civic Si. Or the L15s from the 2015 Fit and the 2017 Civic Si. That would help me understand your thought process better.

Can anyone else confirm that the first day the RSX S was on sale, manufacturers had completed development of dedicated parts for the new K20? Headers, cat backs, ECU tunes, intakes were ready to install the day the first example was sold from a dealer? I always thought that testing was required and companies used mules to make sure parts fit and worked to spec. But if there was that type of turnaround time back then for specific parts for that motor coming from the B series that is very impressive. Owe, are you able to explain how these parts were developed and manufacturedand ready to buy before the new platform even came out? I honestly am curious and I wonder why companies like hondata, ktuner, greddy, aFe, tein have to take months now to develop products specifically for the highly sought after CTR, very successful standard civic turbos, and the poor selling yet performance oriented civic si.

I clearly remember nice builds in the 90s with DX hatches running 12s, 11s and 10s with swapped motors and tons of other mods. But you shouldn't be focusing on the 11 second time itself. The point is how quickly the car developed to post impressive times for the era it's in. If that translates to 13 seconds or whatever that is not the point. It's the progress that was made to get to a high level in a short time.

In your opinion the progress being made with the current Si isn't impressive and compare it to the 8th Gen at this time. I can say that the current Si is fielded in amateur races right now. Some with the ctr crate motor which is frickin ' sweet and some with hotter L engines. You can mod pretty much anything you want on the car as of now. Big brands have a range of parts available, big brake kits, strut bars, exhausts etc. From Greddy, buddy club stop tech, borla, afe, tein and so on. PRL has been running a 400+ hp Si strong for a few months now. 1.5 liters! Just hilarious stuff being done. I'm actually not sure what is not available for this car right now. So seems fairly comparable to the more successful 8th Gen in terms of support. Even if it's not comparable there is so much stuff out there right now you can really create a beast if you want. Seems like a good start to me by most metrics. But I look forward to your insight about the day one support not based on previous development and made specifically for a certain car. That could change how I view this progress for sure.

Also please try to trim your responses. I try to when I can to keep it a bit easier to read.

Your really off the plot now bud.

1) I didn't say the 2 K20's didn't share similarities. I DID say that they were different enough that RSX stuff didn't work on the Si, which means that everything had to be redeveloped. That said, yes, both engines DID have similar architecture and they have similar architecture to the K20T that is now in the Accord and Type-R.

However, you have missed the entire point, which is that A) neither engine is a clean sheet design and B) they BOTH share fundamental architectural features with the donor, which doesn't mean they are "the same."

But here is the IMPORTANT part. Being based on a 1.5L economy engine with its roots in the Fit, which was designed for low cost, economy and emissions, it is a long stroke, small bore engine with relatively small rods. *Reference Shawn's statement about pushing it much beyond 300WHP on stock rods.

The K20 has much more suitable dimensions for more HP, which becomes important as you add HP.

2) If you don't believe me, go take a look at TOV's project Si, which was actually a pre-production car with full bolt-ons on it. No need to look any further than this site.

3) I'm curious which 10 and 11 second streetable Hondas you are talking about from the 90's. There weren't many around in those days that were streetable, let alone daily drivable. In fact, I went and did some searching about guys like Ed Bergenholtz and Stephan Papadakis. Those were the good days of import drag racing, and I am happy to see that "grassroots" drive returning to the sport.

4) In "my opinion" you are correct. The Honda aftermarket just is nothing like it used to be.

That said, the way Honda got faster development with cars like the 8th gen was actually really simple. They gave a bunch of pre-production prototype cars to the various aftermarket companies and let them develop parts BEFORE the car went on sale or was available in large numbers.

5) As for my statements about the cars being raced, etc, I didn't say the new car wasn't raced. But suffice it to say, there is just not the level of interest that existed before Honda stagnated their STOCK level of performance. The last Si to make a major move forward was the 8th gen and their enthusiast interest has suffered as a result. There seems to be good interest in the Type-R, so hopefully, the car guys in Honda will start to win more battles.

That said, I wasn't disputing the coolness of modifying cars. I was simply saying that I don't think I would comfortable pushing an L15 that hard, just like I would be hesitant to boost a lot of Honda engines that much. The downside is that being a small engine with small rods, you can only do so much before your reliability curve starts to drop significantly.

Hey brochacho.

No, I didn't miss anything, I actually just asked you which set of engines you thought were more similar. The K20 in the 2002 RSX vs the 2006 Si or the L in a 2013 Fit vs a 2017 Si. You haven't responded so you must have missed that.

And that response was what I was waiting for! A preproduction mule was sent out. Thats what I was thinking but I didn't want to say anything first.
Yes totally makes sense why they'd have parts day one then. Did Honda send those to every big name company back then? How ahead of time did they get them? How long did it take for the peeps who didn't get early cars to catch up? I don't recall seeing a program like that for the turbo k20 and l15 based cars this time around. I think it is more accurate to compare progress of companies that received the cars at the same time. Looks like Honda may not be sending stuff ahead of time like they did in the past. Even back then, were they sending them to all the companies or just a select few. Seems pretty expensive considering all the tuners out there but those were the good ol ' days. In the end that means the day one stuff was based on Honda having that kind of program available for tuners. Not only the overall support. Seems like people are working very quickly with less support from the oem this time around which speaks to their enthusiasm at least.

There are articles out there about civics running 10-12s in the 90s. But maybe they were not street able as you say. I don't really care enough to do the searching for you but again the actual times didn't matter. If 11 seconds is impressive now just go by what was impressive then in the 2000s. This first factory boosted Si was doing impressive times without preproduction support in under 5 months. That seems good to me. How long did it take development to get equivalent impressive times for previous gens? It is easier to get gains than NA. But this is also a terrible economy based engine so it's pretty neat to see it cracking 11s.

There's actually a lot of interest in the Si strangely enough as well. Despite its reception and the tears shed there is a lot of kit out there for it. Type R development is still catching up at this point and I believe the fastest 10th Gen is still an Si or a 1.5t civic at this point. There could be a quicker CTR by now but I haven't seen it posted as yet. The Si has had more development time as there was sadly no day one blessings for the CTR either. The CTR will surpass it soon enough, but despite your disdain for the Si platform there is more than enough interest to make the cars really quick, or whatever your goals are. These are all good things for people who enjoy driving Hondas.

Especially for a new car that I daily I would be in a similar boat as you I would not want to push the car too hard. As I said, this type of build isn't for everyone, but it is cool to see what is being done at this point especially without the preproduction support of the past.

Yeah brosef

It doesn't have nearly as much interest as you wish, which is why Honda was just blowing them out again for a $200 a month lease. That was about 2 weeks ago.

That said, I wasn't the one that tried to claim that the Si and the RSX were identical and that parts could bolt across (some could, some couldn't, just like the 2017 Si and the Fit).

As for the Si, I don't have disdain for the platform. I have disdain for the powertrain. Huge difference. But then again, consider the level of mods on the car in this video to get to 360HP... And like I said before, how durable will it be?

P.S. No research on the 90's drag racing scene needed. I was around for it. I also have TONS of magazines from that time period. Good days for import drag racing for sure.

The new Si benefits plenty compared to 10 years ago thanks to general improvements in technology that all cars have implemented. The suspension (particularly the shocks), chassis stiffness, etc. That's why new cars are better than old ones generally, with the likelihood of being better going up as the difference in age gets larger.

And we are talking a factory turbo car vs. a naturally aspirated car. The former will always return bigger gains for the initial investment in modifications.

That said, when you look at powertrain potential, the 1.5T Si has some fundamental limitations where it hits a wall that will raise costs considerably.

1) The internal structure. While this engine was designed for turbocharging, and can run reliably for quite some time at 300 whp, it is also, at heart, an economy engine. That means it has very light components, small bearings, a long stroke and narrow bore. Once you get over 400 lbs-ft of torque you're getting into some very high cylinder loadings. Compared to a K20, the L15T will need 33% more cylinder pressure to generate the same torque, and you're asking much smaller rods and bearings to handle it.

2) The fueling system. The bane of all DI systems these days are the limitations of the DI pump. There are a few aftermarket upgrades available for some cars, but they are generally mildly tweaked versions of factory pumps rather than high output replacements. A new company, XtremeDI, founded by an ex-Bosch employee is looking to change this (has already demonstrated pumps on the new CTR, the GM LT4 Z06 engine and others) by offering true high output replacements. But they are expensive and require substantial ecu retuning to make work.

For the L15T I don't forsee any true high output pumps coming soon, simply because it isn't a high performance engine family. Eventually that may change, but even if you build and upgrade the turbo on the Civic Si, the fuel system will still put a limit on you at around 400 whp on E85.

By comparison, the old K20 was capped out around 250 whp with all the bolt-ons if you stayed NA. Compared the the 260-270 whp you get just with a tune, dp and exhaust on the 1.5T, the latter looks like a great deal.

However, the stock K20 can reliably handle a boosted 400 whp on pump gas, and 500+ whp on E85 (the F20C can handle 600-700 whp on E85 on a completely stock motor as another reference point). A lot of this strength is because these engines were designed to handle 9000 rpm without breaking, which means you have to have quite strong rods and durable bearings. The pistons won't handle detonation (hence, e85) and the ring gaps are too tight to risk letting heat get out of hand, but the fundamental strength is there. Combined with the great cylinder head and high revving ability, you only need 350 lbs-ft of torque at the wheels to to make over 500 whp. That means cylinder pressures are quite low compared to the 350-400 lbs-ft necessary just to get 350 whp on the L15T. So you reduce cylinder pressure while having beefier components to handle it.

Certainly if you're happy with 300 whp, the new Civic Si is the easy winner. And the vast majority of owners will be quite happy with a $2k investment on a $24k car to get that. But once you have to start replacing turbos and fuel systems, the older motor starts to look more attractive (a $200 fuel pump and $500 set of injectors is all you need to support upwards of 500 whp on a K20 - the 1.5T will cost a lot more in that regard). Its simply that, because it was designed as an economy engine, the available headroom on the 1.5T is lower. That's why you won't see the 1.5T developing the long term following the K20 has. OTOH, the K20 turbo in the CTR (and Accord) has a helluva lot more headroom and if there are enough of those engines available, they will be quite popular.

It doesn't have nearly as much interest as you wish, which is why Honda was just blowing them out again for a $200 a month lease. That was about 2 weeks ago.

That said, I wasn't the one that tried to claim that the Si and the RSX were identical and that parts could bolt across (some could, some couldn't, just like the 2017 Si and the Fit).

As for the Si, I don't have disdain for the platform. I have disdain for the powertrain. Huge difference. But then again, consider the level of mods on the car in this video to get to 360HP... And like I said before, how durable will it be?

P.S. No research on the 90's drag racing scene needed. I was around for it. I also have TONS of magazines from that time period. Good days for import drag racing for sure.

Aww frienderson...

How do you know how much interest I wish? I posted this video precisely because I was impressed with the development that has been done on the car to this point. Now I'm being told from an Internet rando that they know my wishes, my desires?!? I in fact don't think a video that I posted with a 360whp Civic showcases note worthy development? Why are you using these powers for forum arguing? This level of telepathy could really help the world. Lol I'm sorry, it's just seeing someone tell me what I think is a pretty hilarious sight to see I couldn't resist. If you truly do have mind powers then I sincerely apologize for my insolence professor xavier.

Where did I say the Si and RSX were identical? I didn't even mention the suspension HUGE DIFFERENCE. I was just talking about development for the k20 in the Si being aided by the fact the type s was out four years earlier. Which you have conceded too in your response when you say some parts can bolt on. Yet you keep dodging my simple question. Which set of motors have more in common? And which bolt ons for the fit are being used for the Si actually? I'm genuinely curious. I didn't think the fit had much aftermarket support and I don't hear it being referenced much in development updates. Also, can you show me at what timestamp the guy talks about all the deep discounts from Honda the vibrant and growing catalogue of parts available for the car so far? I must have blacked out there but it's good to hear from people with experience how the Si's crazy lease prices have hurt the aftermarket. You can really see how it affected the dozens of parts he was using from different brands.

And I do apologize for my faux pas. I should have said powertrain instead of platform. Is there an issue with the level of mods used? What level of mods would be needed to get an 8th Gen to that power level? You could easily do a build pushing over 280hp taking lessons from this setup that costs under 2k and shouldn't be any issue for the car. Depends on your goals right? Durability is a definite concern. But the specific engine hasn't been out for long enough to gauge how far it can go for how long. More time is needed to observe the brave few who truly push past the lease deals and take these cars to the limit.

You know what? You really gave me the nostalgia itch so I a few cursory searches anyway. In my posts I was talking about RSX and Si days initially but I also brought up the 90s when you said NOTHING on the street was doing 11s "back then" . As I figured, it took me less than five minutes to find references to daily driven Hondas that were doing 10s, 11s and 12s back in the 90s with a few even breaking the 10s. The whole import scene was built on people taking their daily driven cheap cars and transforming them in to high performance track or drag specials. A lot of people could not afford to have another car to daily while spending on mods for a civic or prelude. So they would daily their car, bring it to the track and set it up for their run, and then drive it home later that same day. Saying that there was NOTHING on the road during the 2000s that ran 11s on the street is surprisingly incorrect for someone with decades of experience and multiple magazines. Even fast and the furious talks up needing a "10 second car" and that's some shit from 2001 lol. Thats actually why I was confused and even went further back into the 90s since you were initially referring to the RSX 8th Gen timeframe. I'll post a few links even from Web versions of those mags you say you have. Quite nice to see first hand accounts as well. I also remember a couple of my friends, one with a 96 GSR and another with a 00 SiR. The GSR was all motor and could run mid 12s and he drove that thing to highschool everyday(in the 90s). My broseph with the SiR had it boosted and got mid to low 11s and he had baby seats in there! Those are just two examples I remembered personally. It may have taken more work back then but people were absolutely dailying cars that fast.

I have to imagine Jeff or Shawn or other people on this board have their own examples as well. Maybe it is just you didn't know or know of anyone that fast? All it takes is one example to debunk you NOTHING statement.

This guy got this daily driven build into the 12s during the late 90s early 2000s on street tires and eventually in to the 10s. Full interior, 9700rpm!

I even googled that bergenholtz fellow, ended up finding something about his brother Rob. He was talking about his whole crew back in the day. Running 11 second NON vtec '87 integras back in the 90s. His whole crew was running Honda's around that fast to terrorize muscle car drivers on the street! Full interiors, daily driven. Good insight here in this article. Maybe it'll refresh your memory of those days. They definitely moved into doing a lot of track work as well but they all started with the street racing. He even mentions how modern cars are much quicker to get to crazy levels because the parts are there versus them having to fabricate most things from scratch. But that's progress for you right? I garantee you there were also people in the 2000s dailying cars this fast as well. He even mentions it in the article as well. I'm surprised you don't recall all this your magazines must have had articles about guys like this back then:

1) The RSX had an engine that was similar, yet substantially different. The intake manifolds were different, ECU schemes were different, transmission mounting point and block mounting points were also all substantially different. The Si had balance shafts, a different intake manifold, and IIRC a higher compression ratio. More importantly, no ancillaries were the same. Not intakes, headers, exhausts, ECU's, etc. Further, suspensions were 100% different with the RSX featuring the high mount steering rack and the Si not. Rear suspensions were different, etc. And yet, on day 1 there were numerous suspensions available, intakes, headers, exhausts, etc. By this point in the 8th gen's run, the engines were passing 300WHP NA, they were competing in amateur racing series, and you could modify just about any component on the car, with nearly all major vendors producing pretty much all of their product lines for the car. Kits like the Kraftwerks may have even been getting close by this point.

That said, Honda rightfully put the cars out there for the aftermarket to develop stuff, but the more important part of that was that DEMAND for the car was so high that it made it justifiable.

And yes, the pace of development for the RSX-S was also very rapid as was the pace for the B16 Civic Si.

But back then, pretty much NOTHING on the street was running 11's, so to use that as a benchmark is incorrect. They WERE seeing relatively large HP gains and they were developed rapidly. You are also partly correct in that they shared SOME componentry with the RSX, but not enough to where much of the stuff would just bolt across. Some was sharable, a lot was not.

I'm just responding to you bud. Nothing more.

Interesting statements here so I just want to make sure I'm clear. You were quick to point out that the L series in the Si is based on 15 year old architecture and really downplay it's relative changes for the specific configuration. Then later you make sure to highlight all the changes in the K20 from the RSX S to the 8th Si. You point out differences in the K20 but stress similarities in the L15s. From my end I'd like to ask from your understanding which two motors are more similar? The K20s from the 2002 RSX S and 2006 Civic Si. Or the L15s from the 2015 Fit and the 2017 Civic Si. That would help me understand your thought process better.

Can anyone else confirm that the first day the RSX S was on sale, manufacturers had completed development of dedicated parts for the new K20? Headers, cat backs, ECU tunes, intakes were ready to install the day the first example was sold from a dealer? I always thought that testing was required and companies used mules to make sure parts fit and worked to spec. But if there was that type of turnaround time back then for specific parts for that motor coming from the B series that is very impressive. Owe, are you able to explain how these parts were developed and manufacturedand ready to buy before the new platform even came out? I honestly am curious and I wonder why companies like hondata, ktuner, greddy, aFe, tein have to take months now to develop products specifically for the highly sought after CTR, very successful standard civic turbos, and the poor selling yet performance oriented civic si.

I clearly remember nice builds in the 90s with DX hatches running 12s, 11s and 10s with swapped motors and tons of other mods. But you shouldn't be focusing on the 11 second time itself. The point is how quickly the car developed to post impressive times for the era it's in. If that translates to 13 seconds or whatever that is not the point. It's the progress that was made to get to a high level in a short time.

In your opinion the progress being made with the current Si isn't impressive and compare it to the 8th Gen at this time. I can say that the current Si is fielded in amateur races right now. Some with the ctr crate motor which is frickin ' sweet and some with hotter L engines. You can mod pretty much anything you want on the car as of now. Big brands have a range of parts available, big brake kits, strut bars, exhausts etc. From Greddy, buddy club stop tech, borla, afe, tein and so on. PRL has been running a 400+ hp Si strong for a few months now. 1.5 liters! Just hilarious stuff being done. I'm actually not sure what is not available for this car right now. So seems fairly comparable to the more successful 8th Gen in terms of support. Even if it's not comparable there is so much stuff out there right now you can really create a beast if you want. Seems like a good start to me by most metrics. But I look forward to your insight about the day one support not based on previous development and made specifically for a certain car. That could change how I view this progress for sure.

Also please try to trim your responses. I try to when I can to keep it a bit easier to read.

Your really off the plot now bud.

1) I didn't say the 2 K20's didn't share similarities. I DID say that they were different enough that RSX stuff didn't work on the Si, which means that everything had to be redeveloped. That said, yes, both engines DID have similar architecture and they have similar architecture to the K20T that is now in the Accord and Type-R.

However, you have missed the entire point, which is that A) neither engine is a clean sheet design and B) they BOTH share fundamental architectural features with the donor, which doesn't mean they are "the same."

But here is the IMPORTANT part. Being based on a 1.5L economy engine with its roots in the Fit, which was designed for low cost, economy and emissions, it is a long stroke, small bore engine with relatively small rods. *Reference Shawn's statement about pushing it much beyond 300WHP on stock rods.

The K20 has much more suitable dimensions for more HP, which becomes important as you add HP.

2) If you don't believe me, go take a look at TOV's project Si, which was actually a pre-production car with full bolt-ons on it. No need to look any further than this site.

3) I'm curious which 10 and 11 second streetable Hondas you are talking about from the 90's. There weren't many around in those days that were streetable, let alone daily drivable. In fact, I went and did some searching about guys like Ed Bergenholtz and Stephan Papadakis. Those were the good days of import drag racing, and I am happy to see that "grassroots" drive returning to the sport.

4) In "my opinion" you are correct. The Honda aftermarket just is nothing like it used to be.

That said, the way Honda got faster development with cars like the 8th gen was actually really simple. They gave a bunch of pre-production prototype cars to the various aftermarket companies and let them develop parts BEFORE the car went on sale or was available in large numbers.

5) As for my statements about the cars being raced, etc, I didn't say the new car wasn't raced. But suffice it to say, there is just not the level of interest that existed before Honda stagnated their STOCK level of performance. The last Si to make a major move forward was the 8th gen and their enthusiast interest has suffered as a result. There seems to be good interest in the Type-R, so hopefully, the car guys in Honda will start to win more battles.

That said, I wasn't disputing the coolness of modifying cars. I was simply saying that I don't think I would comfortable pushing an L15 that hard, just like I would be hesitant to boost a lot of Honda engines that much. The downside is that being a small engine with small rods, you can only do so much before your reliability curve starts to drop significantly.

Hey brochacho.

No, I didn't miss anything, I actually just asked you which set of engines you thought were more similar. The K20 in the 2002 RSX vs the 2006 Si or the L in a 2013 Fit vs a 2017 Si. You haven't responded so you must have missed that.

And that response was what I was waiting for! A preproduction mule was sent out. Thats what I was thinking but I didn't want to say anything first.
Yes totally makes sense why they'd have parts day one then. Did Honda send those to every big name company back then? How ahead of time did they get them? How long did it take for the peeps who didn't get early cars to catch up? I don't recall seeing a program like that for the turbo k20 and l15 based cars this time around. I think it is more accurate to compare progress of companies that received the cars at the same time. Looks like Honda may not be sending stuff ahead of time like they did in the past. Even back then, were they sending them to all the companies or just a select few. Seems pretty expensive considering all the tuners out there but those were the good ol ' days. In the end that means the day one stuff was based on Honda having that kind of program available for tuners. Not only the overall support. Seems like people are working very quickly with less support from the oem this time around which speaks to their enthusiasm at least.

There are articles out there about civics running 10-12s in the 90s. But maybe they were not street able as you say. I don't really care enough to do the searching for you but again the actual times didn't matter. If 11 seconds is impressive now just go by what was impressive then in the 2000s. This first factory boosted Si was doing impressive times without preproduction support in under 5 months. That seems good to me. How long did it take development to get equivalent impressive times for previous gens? It is easier to get gains than NA. But this is also a terrible economy based engine so it's pretty neat to see it cracking 11s.

There's actually a lot of interest in the Si strangely enough as well. Despite its reception and the tears shed there is a lot of kit out there for it. Type R development is still catching up at this point and I believe the fastest 10th Gen is still an Si or a 1.5t civic at this point. There could be a quicker CTR by now but I haven't seen it posted as yet. The Si has had more development time as there was sadly no day one blessings for the CTR either. The CTR will surpass it soon enough, but despite your disdain for the Si platform there is more than enough interest to make the cars really quick, or whatever your goals are. These are all good things for people who enjoy driving Hondas.

Especially for a new car that I daily I would be in a similar boat as you I would not want to push the car too hard. As I said, this type of build isn't for everyone, but it is cool to see what is being done at this point especially without the preproduction support of the past.

Yeah brosef

It doesn't have nearly as much interest as you wish, which is why Honda was just blowing them out again for a $200 a month lease. That was about 2 weeks ago.

That said, I wasn't the one that tried to claim that the Si and the RSX were identical and that parts could bolt across (some could, some couldn't, just like the 2017 Si and the Fit).

As for the Si, I don't have disdain for the platform. I have disdain for the powertrain. Huge difference. But then again, consider the level of mods on the car in this video to get to 360HP... And like I said before, how durable will it be?

P.S. No research on the 90's drag racing scene needed. I was around for it. I also have TONS of magazines from that time period. Good days for import drag racing for sure.

Nicely done, Brotato Chip.

It is kind of fun reading these debates about Honda's truck engine vs. the Fit motivator. I have to admit that whenever I see a Gold Wing on the road I think "I bet that engine would work in the Fit."

Opps! The first link I used was pointing to a different article. Still a nice build tho. Try this link instead:

http://dsportmag.com/the-cars/10-second-daily-driven-honda-civic-ek/

I'm still curious about others with experience in these eras. No one else has chimed in but I can't be the only one who recalls dailies in that speed range those days. From like 13s-10s in the late 90s to early-mid 2000s.

KaySee wrote:Opps! The first link I used was pointing to a different article. Still a nice build tho. Try this link instead:

http://dsportmag.com/the-cars/10-second-daily-driven-honda-civic-ek/

I'm still curious about others with experience in these eras. No one else has chimed in but I can't be the only one who recalls dailies in that speed range those days. From like 13s-10s in the late 90s to early-mid 2000s.

Hmmm....

First, my ACTUAL statement was this:

"But back then, pretty much NOTHING on the street was running 11's."

"Pretty much" was not an absolute statement. It was a qualifier. As in "most", "not many", "rare occurrence."

Here is an article from about 8 months before that article that put Paul Coggeshall in the 12's. So he must have made progress between the two. That's great for him, but it isn't really following in the timeline I am speaking of.

Second, he was running a B-series, which by that point had been around for more than 10 years. DOHC VTEC versions of the B-series had been in the US for over 10 years as well. The K-Series was 2 years old (on the market).

Third, this is important because in roughly 1998-1999 Ed Bergenholtz was still competing for fastest FWD unibody Honda, and he was dropping into the 10's and then 9's at this timeframe. He had a "full unibody" car, but it was far from "streetable" as it had a full cage, fiberglass front end, drag optimized suspension, and wheelie bars. It may have even had a full interior, but it was nowhere near "streetable." Nor was Stephan Papadakis' car, which was the other car competing for fastest FWD.

Timelines matter because by 2000, Stephan had moved to a full tube frame to continue the march on ET's. By 2003, the leading edge of Honda drag racing wasn't gunning for 10's, they were gunning for 8's or 7's. This is about the time I stopped following import drag racing because it had become too corporatized and political, removing it from its "under dog" grassroots spirit. The progress during this era was especially rapid due to the amount of interest in Honda platforms, and specifically DOHC VTEC engines in particular. Showing a car running 10's in August of 2003 is not the same as showing one running it even 2001. Also, keep in mind that a STOCK Mustang GT wouldn't run low 14's until the 1999 model came along:

This is especially important to keep in mind, because in this era, "taking down V8's" would have been a lot different than it is today. Back then, a CRX with a stock B-series swap could do it, and cars like the Integra or Civic could do it with some bolt-ons and a few other minor mods. The average tuner had NOTHING like these mega-boosted drag special cars, and they were nowhere near common, as you try to pretend they were. I wasn't saying they didn't exist. I was saying that there was very little change you were going to actually see it back then. By "back then" I mean the DOHC VTEC B, H and very early K-series era. A stock Integra GS-R was close enough to a Mustang that a few bolt-ons would get you there. A bone stock Type-R would run with it all day long and then kill it on a track. Put that same B18C in a car that weighed about 600lbs less (1988-1991 CRX Si) and you ended up with a little rocket that would shame much more impressive cars*:

*Sadly, this is why theft of the Integra, 99-00 Civic Si and any other DOHC VTEC Honda became so bad in the 90's and 2000's. I personally know a couple of Type-R's and GS-R's that got stolen more than once, stripped, rebuilt and then stolen again, etc.

Fourth, you seem to be reading a lot between the lines, that I don't believe is there. I had forgotten about Ron's Integra, but it is stretch to assume that everybody drove only Honda, since Wicked Racing was a lot of different people. He did say "his crew," but he didn't say they were all Honda. That said, when they started racing the CRX in the mid to late 90's the WORLD record was 11.2s when he ran an 11.9 with an engine that had everything thrown at it. So they were far from common.

Fifth, even to this day, the number of Honda cars that run these speeds/times is relatively rare. Certainly more common than they used to be, but you are unlikely to happen upon one on most days. Most of them are either bolt-on or very close to stock, and the ones that DO run that fast are pretty far and few between.

Also, keep in mind that in the late 90's a lot of people talked a big game, but couldn't really back it up. I have seen Civic "kids" tell me all about their B-Series swap and how fast it was when the engine was clearly a stock D-series (they just assumed nobody knew better). I even had a kid once tell me his alternator was his supercharger, and he then regaled me with a talel about how he fabricated it himself and did all the work etc. Unfortunately, this stuff plus the fad of fiberglass trash is what gave Honda enthusiasts the reputation as ricers.

Finally, as for your K series timeline and its time for development, don't forget that the L15T has been out since 2016, so it is a few more than 1 year into its development. The engine in the Si, is a CRV engine, and I would guess that as soon as some of these companies heard the same rumors Shawn did about the L15 going into the Si, they started looking at it. By this point in its development, the RSX-S had superchargers, turbochargers, cams, springs, pistons, rods, intake manifolds and all sorts of other stuff that was driving the performance as much as it is being driven today (if not more so). Also, like Shawn said, back then the majority of Hondas were dealing with NA, so of course they weren't getting the types of HP gains today's Hondas are with boosted engines. That said, they WERE on par for their day (until everyone else boosted and they were quickly eclipsed circa 2003-2004).

You can try to belittle my "real world experience" all you want, but the reality remains that the pace of development from 1996-2008ish was MUCH more rapid than anything being done in the Honda scene today. The demand just isn't there for them anymore. Too many options available for good money and they just don't stand out like they used to. Not a dig on anything other than wishing they would pull out the stops to get their performance credibility back.

As for your statements about the current Si, it would be a lot more fun, IMO, to be able to reflash a 100% stock engine and get to your ~300WHP and ~280WTQ and still have a ton of headroom left in the engine on pump gas. I just wouldn't trust an L15T running that kind of boost to hold together for me for well over 100K miles.

The new Si benefits plenty compared to 10 years ago thanks to general improvements in technology that all cars have implemented. The suspension (particularly the shocks), chassis stiffness, etc. That's why new cars are better than old ones generally, with the likelihood of being better going up as the difference in age gets larger.

And we are talking a factory turbo car vs. a naturally aspirated car. The former will always return bigger gains for the initial investment in modifications.

That said, when you look at powertrain potential, the 1.5T Si has some fundamental limitations where it hits a wall that will raise costs considerably.

1) The internal structure. While this engine was designed for turbocharging, and can run reliably for quite some time at 300 whp, it is also, at heart, an economy engine. That means it has very light components, small bearings, a long stroke and narrow bore. Once you get over 400 lbs-ft of torque you're getting into some very high cylinder loadings. Compared to a K20, the L15T will need 33% more cylinder pressure to generate the same torque, and you're asking much smaller rods and bearings to handle it.

2) The fueling system. The bane of all DI systems these days are the limitations of the DI pump. There are a few aftermarket upgrades available for some cars, but they are generally mildly tweaked versions of factory pumps rather than high output replacements. A new company, XtremeDI, founded by an ex-Bosch employee is looking to change this (has already demonstrated pumps on the new CTR, the GM LT4 Z06 engine and others) by offering true high output replacements. But they are expensive and require substantial ecu retuning to make work.

For the L15T I don't forsee any true high output pumps coming soon, simply because it isn't a high performance engine family. Eventually that may change, but even if you build and upgrade the turbo on the Civic Si, the fuel system will still put a limit on you at around 400 whp on E85.

By comparison, the old K20 was capped out around 250 whp with all the bolt-ons if you stayed NA. Compared the the 260-270 whp you get just with a tune, dp and exhaust on the 1.5T, the latter looks like a great deal.

However, the stock K20 can reliably handle a boosted 400 whp on pump gas, and 500+ whp on E85 (the F20C can handle 600-700 whp on E85 on a completely stock motor as another reference point). A lot of this strength is because these engines were designed to handle 9000 rpm without breaking, which means you have to have quite strong rods and durable bearings. The pistons won't handle detonation (hence, e85) and the ring gaps are too tight to risk letting heat get out of hand, but the fundamental strength is there. Combined with the great cylinder head and high revving ability, you only need 350 lbs-ft of torque at the wheels to to make over 500 whp. That means cylinder pressures are quite low compared to the 350-400 lbs-ft necessary just to get 350 whp on the L15T. So you reduce cylinder pressure while having beefier components to handle it.

Certainly if you're happy with 300 whp, the new Civic Si is the easy winner. And the vast majority of owners will be quite happy with a $2k investment on a $24k car to get that. But once you have to start replacing turbos and fuel systems, the older motor starts to look more attractive (a $200 fuel pump and $500 set of injectors is all you need to support upwards of 500 whp on a K20 - the 1.5T will cost a lot more in that regard). Its simply that, because it was designed as an economy engine, the available headroom on the 1.5T is lower. That's why you won't see the 1.5T developing the long term following the K20 has. OTOH, the K20 turbo in the CTR (and Accord) has a helluva lot more headroom and if there are enough of those engines available, they will be quite popular.

SC

This was well put and informative. I also thought Owes claim that NA K20s were passing 300whp to be pretty optimistic. The 250hp range seems more accurate for most higher end builds. I'm sure there are some extreme examples out there but I would differ to your experience with the motor there.

Even though I don't see anyone disputing the inherit limitations of the L15s this is valuable info for people curious for more details about the pros and cons of working with this type of motor.

Have you had a chance to check out the build in this video? These guys have done great work with past set ups so I figured some people would like what they saw here. A valid concern owe brought up was durability/longevity like you touched on. But the pump/fuel system is something I've seen discussed rarely and I believe that is a very notable issue to highlight that may not get resolved for high hp builds for the time being.

As I mentioned PRL has been running a 400+ hp Si for some time now but I would have to assume they put in better rods and did other internal work with that engine. They themselves note that it is very early in their testing so they will need more time to gauge durability as the configuration of the motor is new.

Like you, I anticipate the k20ts to be quite the darlings in the aftermarket. They already are, and support is just growing. But again, the support I've seen so far and examples like this video are examples of pretty good showings so far for this economy motor. As you say, depending on your goals this config could make some peeps pretty satisfied.

KaySee wrote:Opps! The first link I used was pointing to a different article. Still a nice build tho. Try this link instead:

http://dsportmag.com/the-cars/10-second-daily-driven-honda-civic-ek/

I'm still curious about others with experience in these eras. No one else has chimed in but I can't be the only one who recalls dailies in that speed range those days. From like 13s-10s in the late 90s to early-mid 2000s.

Hmmm....

First, my ACTUAL statement was this:

"But back then, pretty much NOTHING on the street was running 11's."

"Pretty much" was not an absolute statement. It was a qualifier. As in "most", "not many", "rare occurrence."

Here is an article from about 8 months before that article that put Paul Coggeshall in the 12's. So he must have made progress between the two. That's great for him, but it isn't really following in the timeline I am speaking of.

Second, he was running a B-series, which by that point had been around for more than 10 years. DOHC VTEC versions of the B-series had been in the US for over 10 years as well. The K-Series was 2 years old (on the market).

Third, this is important because in roughly 1998-1999 Ed Bergenholtz was still competing for fastest FWD unibody Honda, and he was dropping into the 10's and then 9's at this timeframe. He had a "full unibody" car, but it was far from "streetable" as it had a full cage, fiberglass front end, drag optimized suspension, and wheelie bars. It may have even had a full interior, but it was nowhere near "streetable." Nor was Stephan Papadakis' car, which was the other car competing for fastest FWD.

Timelines matter because by 2000, Stephan had moved to a full tube frame to continue the march on ET's. By 2003, the leading edge of Honda drag racing wasn't gunning for 10's, they were gunning for 8's or 7's. This is about the time I stopped following import drag racing because it had become too corporatized and political, removing it from its "under dog" grassroots spirit. The progress during this era was especially rapid due to the amount of interest in Honda platforms, and specifically DOHC VTEC engines in particular. Showing a car running 10's in August of 2003 is not the same as showing one running it even 2001. Also, keep in mind that a STOCK Mustang GT wouldn't run low 14's until the 1999 model came along:

This is especially important to keep in mind, because in this era, "taking down V8's" would have been a lot different than it is today. Back then, a CRX with a stock B-series swap could do it, and cars like the Integra or Civic could do it with some bolt-ons and a few other minor mods. The average tuner had NOTHING like these mega-boosted drag special cars, and they were nowhere near common, as you try to pretend they were. I wasn't saying they didn't exist. I was saying that there was very little change you were going to actually see it back then. By "back then" I mean the DOHC VTEC B, H and very early K-series era. A stock Integra GS-R was close enough to a Mustang that a few bolt-ons would get you there. A bone stock Type-R would run with it all day long and then kill it on a track. Put that same B18C in a car that weighed about 600lbs less (1988-1991 CRX Si) and you ended up with a little rocket that would shame much more impressive cars*:

*Sadly, this is why theft of the Integra, 99-00 Civic Si and any other DOHC VTEC Honda became so bad in the 90's and 2000's. I personally know a couple of Type-R's and GS-R's that got stolen more than once, stripped, rebuilt and then stolen again, etc.

Fourth, you seem to be reading a lot between the lines, that I don't believe is there. I had forgotten about Ron's Integra, but it is stretch to assume that everybody drove only Honda, since Wicked Racing was a lot of different people. He did say "his crew," but he didn't say they were all Honda. That said, when they started racing the CRX in the mid to late 90's the WORLD record was 11.2s when he ran an 11.9 with an engine that had everything thrown at it. So they were far from common.

Fifth, even to this day, the number of Honda cars that run these speeds/times is relatively rare. Certainly more common than they used to be, but you are unlikely to happen upon one on most days. Most of them are either bolt-on or very close to stock, and the ones that DO run that fast are pretty far and few between.

Also, keep in mind that in the late 90's a lot of people talked a big game, but couldn't really back it up. I have seen Civic "kids" tell me all about their B-Series swap and how fast it was when the engine was clearly a stock D-series (they just assumed nobody knew better). I even had a kid once tell me his alternator was his supercharger, and he then regaled me with a talel about how he fabricated it himself and did all the work etc. Unfortunately, this stuff plus the fad of fiberglass trash is what gave Honda enthusiasts the reputation as ricers.

Finally, as for your K series timeline and its time for development, don't forget that the L15T has been out since 2016, so it is a few more than 1 year into its development. The engine in the Si, is a CRV engine, and I would guess that as soon as some of these companies heard the same rumors Shawn did about the L15 going into the Si, they started looking at it. By this point in its development, the RSX-S had superchargers, turbochargers, cams, springs, pistons, rods, intake manifolds and all sorts of other stuff that was driving the performance as much as it is being driven today (if not more so). Also, like Shawn said, back then the majority of Hondas were dealing with NA, so of course they weren't getting the types of HP gains today's Hondas are with boosted engines. That said, they WERE on par for their day (until everyone else boosted and they were quickly eclipsed circa 2003-2004).

You can try to belittle my "real world experience" all you want, but the reality remains that the pace of development from 1996-2008ish was MUCH more rapid than anything being done in the Honda scene today. The demand just isn't there for them anymore. Too many options available for good money and they just don't stand out like they used to. Not a dig on anything other than wishing they would pull out the stops to get their performance credibility back.

As for your statements about the current Si, it would be a lot more fun, IMO, to be able to reflash a 100% stock engine and get to your ~300WHP and ~280WTQ and still have a ton of headroom left in the engine on pump gas. I just wouldn't trust an L15T running that kind of boost to hold together for me for well over 100K miles.

They upped the Si lease to $229, but when I looked last month, it was $209. Inventories must be getting lower finally. I would still expect to see a lot less supply next year.

Yes timelines do matter I agree. Your comment was based on our discussion about the RSX and 8th Si. I was the one who brought up the 90s because how inaccurate I felt that statement "pretty much NOTHING on the street was running 11s" when referring to cars of the early and mid 2000s. If you are softening pretty much nothing in ALL caps to mean "not many". Thats up to you. But I can only go off what you write not any amendments or " explanations" you try to add later. But if you were a part of the scene in the late 90s and 2000s you would know a statement like that is inaccurate. You asked me to find examples and I did for cars in the 90s and 2000s. You can pick apart whatever you want but you can easily google search more examples for yourself. When I think of pretty much NOTHING I think of close to nothing which is zero. So when I go to a track day in the 90s or 2000s I should see almost no cars running under 13s, hitting 12s and 11s and driving home after, but that just was not true. The issue published in in 2003 was to refute your initial claim of cars in the 2000s. Even if you were talking about B series cars new cars with those motors were being made in the early 2000s as well so it works either way. The article with Ron in the 90s he mentioned his whole crew being in the 11s. We never specified just Honda's initially you just threw that in. Even so, a lot of that explosion in tuning was due to Hondas so I'm sure there were a good amount sprinkled in.

I even found a documentary on the legal/iilegal drag racing scene in Toronto in the late 90s. They even showed track days with guys hitting low times like 12.1 in 98 and breaking in to 11s before the y2k. These were the same guys going to the coffee shop after and street racing the same cars they took to the track. Not to mention that Toronto was well behind the US in the import scene and our weather kept us from running all year. I used to go to these track days and there were dozens of people who blew money on builds like that.

In the 90s to mid 2000s you didn't have to be a mega Tuner to get times like I mentioned. You had to be invested for sure but guys were fabricating their own stuff and pulling stuff off with budgets in the 15k range like one of the articles stated.

Sure you may not "come across" one just driving through town but the Tuner crowd is a very small subset of the driving public. Doesn't mean a bunch of them are not out there. If I drive around and see pretty much NOTHING in terms of Type Rs, or heavily modded cars but then go to meet up and see hundreds of specials out there that doesn't equate to pretty much NOTHING. And if you ever went to track meets you wouldn't have to pretend you'd see them all for yourself. All these like minded people would congregate and I would see many cars running 11s and 12s then driving home after and that was far from pretty much NOTHING.

And again you prove my point. If leading edge is gunning for times as low as 7s in only 2003 that means cars that were 5 seconds slower were much easier to come by in the earlier 2000s. It's just progress. If you want the link to the documentary showing the Toronto scene at that time for another example of dailyed 12-11 second Honda's in a region trying to catch up with the explosion down south let me know, the quality is poor but it's there.

Again the timelines match up, there were more than "pretty much NOTHING" in terms of cars running 11s in the 90s and early 2000s. And even according to you people were chasing 7s while still in the early 2000s so that reinforces the fact that cars of that nature were not unicorns before that. 11 is still a decent time I think. So that's why I used it as an example of a car that had some decent work done to it. I never said cars at that pace were common in any era. Just not as scarce as your exposure to them or recollection of that time seems. I would upgrade your pretty much NOTHING to a decent amount.

Oh yeah and if you are talking about STOCK muscle cars in terms of street racing that is also confusing.
Domestics would have been doing the same thing the imports were doing as well, for much longer. So clearly a "decent amount" of these mustangs etc. That his crew were encountering were notably faster than stock. The imports would have to be fairly quick to take on modded v8s. Thats probably why he noted most of his crew was running in the 11s.

I never said the current pace is faster than the previous eras. Just noted that the build in the video was impressive and indicative of the progress that was made in a short time with a first factory boosted Si. And I also mentioned turbo gains would be easier than NA so you can reference me as well as Shawn.

Your opinions are noted on what you believe would be more fun. I'm glad a lot of people are enjoying themselves right now and there are tons of parts and support available for the L15B7 for those who want to see what they can do.

The new Si benefits plenty compared to 10 years ago thanks to general improvements in technology that all cars have implemented. The suspension (particularly the shocks), chassis stiffness, etc. That's why new cars are better than old ones generally, with the likelihood of being better going up as the difference in age gets larger.

And we are talking a factory turbo car vs. a naturally aspirated car. The former will always return bigger gains for the initial investment in modifications.

That said, when you look at powertrain potential, the 1.5T Si has some fundamental limitations where it hits a wall that will raise costs considerably.

1) The internal structure. While this engine was designed for turbocharging, and can run reliably for quite some time at 300 whp, it is also, at heart, an economy engine. That means it has very light components, small bearings, a long stroke and narrow bore. Once you get over 400 lbs-ft of torque you're getting into some very high cylinder loadings. Compared to a K20, the L15T will need 33% more cylinder pressure to generate the same torque, and you're asking much smaller rods and bearings to handle it.

2) The fueling system. The bane of all DI systems these days are the limitations of the DI pump. There are a few aftermarket upgrades available for some cars, but they are generally mildly tweaked versions of factory pumps rather than high output replacements. A new company, XtremeDI, founded by an ex-Bosch employee is looking to change this (has already demonstrated pumps on the new CTR, the GM LT4 Z06 engine and others) by offering true high output replacements. But they are expensive and require substantial ecu retuning to make work.

For the L15T I don't forsee any true high output pumps coming soon, simply because it isn't a high performance engine family. Eventually that may change, but even if you build and upgrade the turbo on the Civic Si, the fuel system will still put a limit on you at around 400 whp on E85.

By comparison, the old K20 was capped out around 250 whp with all the bolt-ons if you stayed NA. Compared the the 260-270 whp you get just with a tune, dp and exhaust on the 1.5T, the latter looks like a great deal.

However, the stock K20 can reliably handle a boosted 400 whp on pump gas, and 500+ whp on E85 (the F20C can handle 600-700 whp on E85 on a completely stock motor as another reference point). A lot of this strength is because these engines were designed to handle 9000 rpm without breaking, which means you have to have quite strong rods and durable bearings. The pistons won't handle detonation (hence, e85) and the ring gaps are too tight to risk letting heat get out of hand, but the fundamental strength is there. Combined with the great cylinder head and high revving ability, you only need 350 lbs-ft of torque at the wheels to to make over 500 whp. That means cylinder pressures are quite low compared to the 350-400 lbs-ft necessary just to get 350 whp on the L15T. So you reduce cylinder pressure while having beefier components to handle it.

Certainly if you're happy with 300 whp, the new Civic Si is the easy winner. And the vast majority of owners will be quite happy with a $2k investment on a $24k car to get that. But once you have to start replacing turbos and fuel systems, the older motor starts to look more attractive (a $200 fuel pump and $500 set of injectors is all you need to support upwards of 500 whp on a K20 - the 1.5T will cost a lot more in that regard). Its simply that, because it was designed as an economy engine, the available headroom on the 1.5T is lower. That's why you won't see the 1.5T developing the long term following the K20 has. OTOH, the K20 turbo in the CTR (and Accord) has a helluva lot more headroom and if there are enough of those engines available, they will be quite popular.

SC

This was well put and informative. I also thought Owes claim that NA K20s were passing 300whp to be pretty optimistic. The 250hp range seems more accurate for most higher end builds. I'm sure there are some extreme examples out there but I would differ to your experience with the motor there.

Even though I don't see anyone disputing the inherit limitations of the L15s this is valuable info for people curious for more details about the pros and cons of working with this type of motor.

Have you had a chance to check out the build in this video? These guys have done great work with past set ups so I figured some people would like what they saw here. A valid concern owe brought up was durability/longevity like you touched on. But the pump/fuel system is something I've seen discussed rarely and I believe that is a very notable issue to highlight that may not get resolved for high hp builds for the time being.

As I mentioned PRL has been running a 400+ hp Si for some time now but I would have to assume they put in better rods and did other internal work with that engine. They themselves note that it is very early in their testing so they will need more time to gauge durability as the configuration of the motor is new.

Like you, I anticipate the k20ts to be quite the darlings in the aftermarket. They already are, and support is just growing. But again, the support I've seen so far and examples like this video are examples of pretty good showings so far for this economy motor. As you say, depending on your goals this config could make some peeps pretty satisfied.

Another attempt at an insult. The problem is that my "estimates" weren't optimistic.

Shawn said max for a K20. Not 2.0L. As soon as the K series came, the K24 was right behind it and a K24 with a K20DOHC VTEC head and bolt ons will, in fact, hit 300WHP.

I was making a generalized K-series statement and you are incorrectly attributing it to strictly a K20 statement.

KaySee wrote:Opps! The first link I used was pointing to a different article. Still a nice build tho. Try this link instead:

http://dsportmag.com/the-cars/10-second-daily-driven-honda-civic-ek/

I'm still curious about others with experience in these eras. No one else has chimed in but I can't be the only one who recalls dailies in that speed range those days. From like 13s-10s in the late 90s to early-mid 2000s.

Hmmm....

First, my ACTUAL statement was this:

"But back then, pretty much NOTHING on the street was running 11's."

"Pretty much" was not an absolute statement. It was a qualifier. As in "most", "not many", "rare occurrence."

Here is an article from about 8 months before that article that put Paul Coggeshall in the 12's. So he must have made progress between the two. That's great for him, but it isn't really following in the timeline I am speaking of.

Second, he was running a B-series, which by that point had been around for more than 10 years. DOHC VTEC versions of the B-series had been in the US for over 10 years as well. The K-Series was 2 years old (on the market).

Third, this is important because in roughly 1998-1999 Ed Bergenholtz was still competing for fastest FWD unibody Honda, and he was dropping into the 10's and then 9's at this timeframe. He had a "full unibody" car, but it was far from "streetable" as it had a full cage, fiberglass front end, drag optimized suspension, and wheelie bars. It may have even had a full interior, but it was nowhere near "streetable." Nor was Stephan Papadakis' car, which was the other car competing for fastest FWD.

Timelines matter because by 2000, Stephan had moved to a full tube frame to continue the march on ET's. By 2003, the leading edge of Honda drag racing wasn't gunning for 10's, they were gunning for 8's or 7's. This is about the time I stopped following import drag racing because it had become too corporatized and political, removing it from its "under dog" grassroots spirit. The progress during this era was especially rapid due to the amount of interest in Honda platforms, and specifically DOHC VTEC engines in particular. Showing a car running 10's in August of 2003 is not the same as showing one running it even 2001. Also, keep in mind that a STOCK Mustang GT wouldn't run low 14's until the 1999 model came along:

This is especially important to keep in mind, because in this era, "taking down V8's" would have been a lot different than it is today. Back then, a CRX with a stock B-series swap could do it, and cars like the Integra or Civic could do it with some bolt-ons and a few other minor mods. The average tuner had NOTHING like these mega-boosted drag special cars, and they were nowhere near common, as you try to pretend they were. I wasn't saying they didn't exist. I was saying that there was very little change you were going to actually see it back then. By "back then" I mean the DOHC VTEC B, H and very early K-series era. A stock Integra GS-R was close enough to a Mustang that a few bolt-ons would get you there. A bone stock Type-R would run with it all day long and then kill it on a track. Put that same B18C in a car that weighed about 600lbs less (1988-1991 CRX Si) and you ended up with a little rocket that would shame much more impressive cars*:

*Sadly, this is why theft of the Integra, 99-00 Civic Si and any other DOHC VTEC Honda became so bad in the 90's and 2000's. I personally know a couple of Type-R's and GS-R's that got stolen more than once, stripped, rebuilt and then stolen again, etc.

Fourth, you seem to be reading a lot between the lines, that I don't believe is there. I had forgotten about Ron's Integra, but it is stretch to assume that everybody drove only Honda, since Wicked Racing was a lot of different people. He did say "his crew," but he didn't say they were all Honda. That said, when they started racing the CRX in the mid to late 90's the WORLD record was 11.2s when he ran an 11.9 with an engine that had everything thrown at it. So they were far from common.

Fifth, even to this day, the number of Honda cars that run these speeds/times is relatively rare. Certainly more common than they used to be, but you are unlikely to happen upon one on most days. Most of them are either bolt-on or very close to stock, and the ones that DO run that fast are pretty far and few between.

Also, keep in mind that in the late 90's a lot of people talked a big game, but couldn't really back it up. I have seen Civic "kids" tell me all about their B-Series swap and how fast it was when the engine was clearly a stock D-series (they just assumed nobody knew better). I even had a kid once tell me his alternator was his supercharger, and he then regaled me with a talel about how he fabricated it himself and did all the work etc. Unfortunately, this stuff plus the fad of fiberglass trash is what gave Honda enthusiasts the reputation as ricers.

Finally, as for your K series timeline and its time for development, don't forget that the L15T has been out since 2016, so it is a few more than 1 year into its development. The engine in the Si, is a CRV engine, and I would guess that as soon as some of these companies heard the same rumors Shawn did about the L15 going into the Si, they started looking at it. By this point in its development, the RSX-S had superchargers, turbochargers, cams, springs, pistons, rods, intake manifolds and all sorts of other stuff that was driving the performance as much as it is being driven today (if not more so). Also, like Shawn said, back then the majority of Hondas were dealing with NA, so of course they weren't getting the types of HP gains today's Hondas are with boosted engines. That said, they WERE on par for their day (until everyone else boosted and they were quickly eclipsed circa 2003-2004).

You can try to belittle my "real world experience" all you want, but the reality remains that the pace of development from 1996-2008ish was MUCH more rapid than anything being done in the Honda scene today. The demand just isn't there for them anymore. Too many options available for good money and they just don't stand out like they used to. Not a dig on anything other than wishing they would pull out the stops to get their performance credibility back.

As for your statements about the current Si, it would be a lot more fun, IMO, to be able to reflash a 100% stock engine and get to your ~300WHP and ~280WTQ and still have a ton of headroom left in the engine on pump gas. I just wouldn't trust an L15T running that kind of boost to hold together for me for well over 100K miles.

They upped the Si lease to $229, but when I looked last month, it was $209. Inventories must be getting lower finally. I would still expect to see a lot less supply next year.

Yes timelines do matter I agree. Your comment was based on our discussion about the RSX and 8th Si. I was the one who brought up the 90s because how inaccurate I felt that statement "pretty much NOTHING on the street was running 11s" when referring to cars of the early and mid 2000s. If you are softening pretty much nothing in ALL caps to mean "not many". Thats up to you. But I can only go off what you write not any amendments or " explanations" you try to add later. But if you were a part of the scene in the late 90s and 2000s you would know a statement like that is inaccurate. You asked me to find examples and I did for cars in the 90s and 2000s. You can pick apart whatever you want but you can easily google search more examples for yourself. When I think of pretty much NOTHING I think of close to nothing which is zero. So when I go to a track day in the 90s or 2000s I should see almost no cars running under 13s, hitting 12s and 11s and driving home after, but that just was not true. The issue published in in 2003 was to refute your initial claim of cars in the 2000s. Even if you were talking about B series cars new cars with those motors were being made in the early 2000s as well so it works either way. The article with Ron in the 90s he mentioned his whole crew being in the 11s. We never specified just Honda's initially you just threw that in. Even so, a lot of that explosion in tuning was due to Hondas so I'm sure there were a good amount sprinkled in.

I even found a documentary on the legal/iilegal drag racing scene in Toronto in the late 90s. They even showed track days with guys hitting low times like 12.1 in 98 and breaking in to 11s before the y2k. These were the same guys going to the coffee shop after and street racing the same cars they took to the track. Not to mention that Toronto was well behind the US in the import scene and our weather kept us from running all year. I used to go to these track days and there were dozens of people who blew money on builds like that.

In the 90s to mid 2000s you didn't have to be a mega Tuner to get times like I mentioned. You had to be invested for sure but guys were fabricating their own stuff and pulling stuff off with budgets in the 15k range like one of the articles stated.

Sure you may not "come across" one just driving through town but the Tuner crowd is a very small subset of the driving public. Doesn't mean a bunch of them are not out there. If I drive around and see pretty much NOTHING in terms of Type Rs, or heavily modded cars but then go to meet up and see hundreds of specials out there that doesn't equate to pretty much NOTHING. And if you ever went to track meets you wouldn't have to pretend you'd see them all for yourself. All these like minded people would congregate and I would see many cars running 11s and 12s then driving home after and that was far from pretty much NOTHING.

And again you prove my point. If leading edge is gunning for times as low as 7s in only 2003 that means cars that were 5 seconds slower were much easier to come by in the earlier 2000s. It's just progress. If you want the link to the documentary showing the Toronto scene at that time for another example of dailyed 12-11 second Honda's in a region trying to catch up with the explosion down south let me know, the quality is poor but it's there.

Again the timelines match up, there were more than "pretty much NOTHING" in terms of cars running 11s in the 90s and early 2000s. And even according to you people were chasing 7s while still in the early 2000s so that reinforces the fact that cars of that nature were not unicorns before that. 11 is still a decent time I think. So that's why I used it as an example of a car that had some decent work done to it. I never said cars at that pace were common in any era. Just not as scarce as your exposure to them or recollection of that time seems. I would upgrade your pretty much NOTHING to a decent amount.

Oh yeah and if you are talking about STOCK muscle cars in terms of street racing that is also confusing.
Domestics would have been doing the same thing the imports were doing as well, for much longer. So clearly a "decent amount" of these mustangs etc. That his crew were encountering were notably faster than stock. The imports would have to be fairly quick to take on modded v8s. Thats probably why he noted most of his crew was running in the 11s.

I never said the current pace is faster than the previous eras. Just noted that the build in the video was impressive and indicative of the progress that was made in a short time with a first factory boosted Si. And I also mentioned turbo gains would be easier than NA so you can reference me as well as Shawn.

Your opinions are noted on what you believe would be more fun. I'm glad a lot of people are enjoying themselves right now and there are tons of parts and support available for the L15B7 for those who want to see what they can do.

Yeah, not so much.

There is nothing inaccurate about my statements.

First, you showed me a car that didn't hit 12's until 2003. That is hardly "late 90's" which was MY original statement that you said was "inaccurate."

And you are right, timelines DO matter, which is why your trying to move the goal post 4-5 years into the future isn't going to stand.

You tried to assert that times "in the late 90's" were down in the 11's and there were numerous people running them, which there weren't (outside of fully built race cars, which don't count). So then, when provided information on times, you tried to show me a car that ran a 12 in 2003, which nearly half a decade outside of the 1990's. It was further exacerbated by the fact that you have subtly tried to pretend that moving the timeline somehow counts. I watched a documentary about Ed Bergenholtz and his effect on import drag racing in that era. They were all fighting for 11's. Considering he was the fastest clocked unibody Honda at that point, I find it hard to believe there were all of these legitimately verified 11 second Hondas running around then.

Your opinion on how "impressive" this engine is also noted. But notice that I didn't say a single thing about MY opinion of the engine, and mentioned strictly the structural concerns of pushing the engine to that power level reliably, so that is another straw man you are attempting to thread into the discussion that never occurred.

I don't like the engine in the Si and I have been more than vocal about that. In fact, I made the loudest statement I could by refusing to buy one, despite the fact I liked everything else about the car. But it has nothing to do with the validity of any statement I made in this thread.

As for how "impressive" the timeline for development is, if you were "in the scene" like you claim to be back then, then you KNOW this pace of development is not as fast as it was in Honda's hey day.

Further, how is the development of this "new" engine platform any more impressive than, say, something like the Focus ST? You keep talking about how impressive it is, but compared to its peers, I am just not seeing it.

The new Si benefits plenty compared to 10 years ago thanks to general improvements in technology that all cars have implemented. The suspension (particularly the shocks), chassis stiffness, etc. That's why new cars are better than old ones generally, with the likelihood of being better going up as the difference in age gets larger.

And we are talking a factory turbo car vs. a naturally aspirated car. The former will always return bigger gains for the initial investment in modifications.

That said, when you look at powertrain potential, the 1.5T Si has some fundamental limitations where it hits a wall that will raise costs considerably.

1) The internal structure. While this engine was designed for turbocharging, and can run reliably for quite some time at 300 whp, it is also, at heart, an economy engine. That means it has very light components, small bearings, a long stroke and narrow bore. Once you get over 400 lbs-ft of torque you're getting into some very high cylinder loadings. Compared to a K20, the L15T will need 33% more cylinder pressure to generate the same torque, and you're asking much smaller rods and bearings to handle it.

2) The fueling system. The bane of all DI systems these days are the limitations of the DI pump. There are a few aftermarket upgrades available for some cars, but they are generally mildly tweaked versions of factory pumps rather than high output replacements. A new company, XtremeDI, founded by an ex-Bosch employee is looking to change this (has already demonstrated pumps on the new CTR, the GM LT4 Z06 engine and others) by offering true high output replacements. But they are expensive and require substantial ecu retuning to make work.

For the L15T I don't forsee any true high output pumps coming soon, simply because it isn't a high performance engine family. Eventually that may change, but even if you build and upgrade the turbo on the Civic Si, the fuel system will still put a limit on you at around 400 whp on E85.

By comparison, the old K20 was capped out around 250 whp with all the bolt-ons if you stayed NA. Compared the the 260-270 whp you get just with a tune, dp and exhaust on the 1.5T, the latter looks like a great deal.

However, the stock K20 can reliably handle a boosted 400 whp on pump gas, and 500+ whp on E85 (the F20C can handle 600-700 whp on E85 on a completely stock motor as another reference point). A lot of this strength is because these engines were designed to handle 9000 rpm without breaking, which means you have to have quite strong rods and durable bearings. The pistons won't handle detonation (hence, e85) and the ring gaps are too tight to risk letting heat get out of hand, but the fundamental strength is there. Combined with the great cylinder head and high revving ability, you only need 350 lbs-ft of torque at the wheels to to make over 500 whp. That means cylinder pressures are quite low compared to the 350-400 lbs-ft necessary just to get 350 whp on the L15T. So you reduce cylinder pressure while having beefier components to handle it.

Certainly if you're happy with 300 whp, the new Civic Si is the easy winner. And the vast majority of owners will be quite happy with a $2k investment on a $24k car to get that. But once you have to start replacing turbos and fuel systems, the older motor starts to look more attractive (a $200 fuel pump and $500 set of injectors is all you need to support upwards of 500 whp on a K20 - the 1.5T will cost a lot more in that regard). Its simply that, because it was designed as an economy engine, the available headroom on the 1.5T is lower. That's why you won't see the 1.5T developing the long term following the K20 has. OTOH, the K20 turbo in the CTR (and Accord) has a helluva lot more headroom and if there are enough of those engines available, they will be quite popular.

SC

This was well put and informative. I also thought Owes claim that NA K20s were passing 300whp to be pretty optimistic. The 250hp range seems more accurate for most higher end builds. I'm sure there are some extreme examples out there but I would differ to your experience with the motor there.

Even though I don't see anyone disputing the inherit limitations of the L15s this is valuable info for people curious for more details about the pros and cons of working with this type of motor.

Have you had a chance to check out the build in this video? These guys have done great work with past set ups so I figured some people would like what they saw here. A valid concern owe brought up was durability/longevity like you touched on. But the pump/fuel system is something I've seen discussed rarely and I believe that is a very notable issue to highlight that may not get resolved for high hp builds for the time being.

As I mentioned PRL has been running a 400+ hp Si for some time now but I would have to assume they put in better rods and did other internal work with that engine. They themselves note that it is very early in their testing so they will need more time to gauge durability as the configuration of the motor is new.

Like you, I anticipate the k20ts to be quite the darlings in the aftermarket. They already are, and support is just growing. But again, the support I've seen so far and examples like this video are examples of pretty good showings so far for this economy motor. As you say, depending on your goals this config could make some peeps pretty satisfied.

Another attempt at an insult. The problem is that my "estimates" weren't optimistic.

Shawn said max for a K20. Not 2.0L. As soon as the K series came, the K24 was right behind it and a K24 with a K20DOHC VTEC head and bolt ons will, in fact, hit 300WHP.

I was making a generalized K-series statement and you are incorrectly attributing it to strictly a K20 statement.

By this point in the 8th gen's run, the engines were passing 300WHP NA

That is a cut and paste of your statement. No attempt at insults on my part because I still feel this notion was optimistic. You were specifically calling out the 8th Gen and saying the engines were passing 300whp. That does not look like a general k series statement. You can add on to and reinterpret your own comments all you want but that reads only as a specific reference to 8th Gen Si motors. I'm going by what you typed and nothing else. I can't go by what you add on and make up after you get called out because that would take forever.

Once again:

"By this point in the 8th gen's run, the engines were passing 300WHP NA"

This statement, specifically as you wrote it, regardless of your attempts to modify the meaning of this plain language, is optimistic to me.

KaySee wrote:Opps! The first link I used was pointing to a different article. Still a nice build tho. Try this link instead:

http://dsportmag.com/the-cars/10-second-daily-driven-honda-civic-ek/

I'm still curious about others with experience in these eras. No one else has chimed in but I can't be the only one who recalls dailies in that speed range those days. From like 13s-10s in the late 90s to early-mid 2000s.

Hmmm....

First, my ACTUAL statement was this:

"But back then, pretty much NOTHING on the street was running 11's."

"Pretty much" was not an absolute statement. It was a qualifier. As in "most", "not many", "rare occurrence."

Here is an article from about 8 months before that article that put Paul Coggeshall in the 12's. So he must have made progress between the two. That's great for him, but it isn't really following in the timeline I am speaking of.

Second, he was running a B-series, which by that point had been around for more than 10 years. DOHC VTEC versions of the B-series had been in the US for over 10 years as well. The K-Series was 2 years old (on the market).

Third, this is important because in roughly 1998-1999 Ed Bergenholtz was still competing for fastest FWD unibody Honda, and he was dropping into the 10's and then 9's at this timeframe. He had a "full unibody" car, but it was far from "streetable" as it had a full cage, fiberglass front end, drag optimized suspension, and wheelie bars. It may have even had a full interior, but it was nowhere near "streetable." Nor was Stephan Papadakis' car, which was the other car competing for fastest FWD.

Timelines matter because by 2000, Stephan had moved to a full tube frame to continue the march on ET's. By 2003, the leading edge of Honda drag racing wasn't gunning for 10's, they were gunning for 8's or 7's. This is about the time I stopped following import drag racing because it had become too corporatized and political, removing it from its "under dog" grassroots spirit. The progress during this era was especially rapid due to the amount of interest in Honda platforms, and specifically DOHC VTEC engines in particular. Showing a car running 10's in August of 2003 is not the same as showing one running it even 2001. Also, keep in mind that a STOCK Mustang GT wouldn't run low 14's until the 1999 model came along:

This is especially important to keep in mind, because in this era, "taking down V8's" would have been a lot different than it is today. Back then, a CRX with a stock B-series swap could do it, and cars like the Integra or Civic could do it with some bolt-ons and a few other minor mods. The average tuner had NOTHING like these mega-boosted drag special cars, and they were nowhere near common, as you try to pretend they were. I wasn't saying they didn't exist. I was saying that there was very little change you were going to actually see it back then. By "back then" I mean the DOHC VTEC B, H and very early K-series era. A stock Integra GS-R was close enough to a Mustang that a few bolt-ons would get you there. A bone stock Type-R would run with it all day long and then kill it on a track. Put that same B18C in a car that weighed about 600lbs less (1988-1991 CRX Si) and you ended up with a little rocket that would shame much more impressive cars*:

*Sadly, this is why theft of the Integra, 99-00 Civic Si and any other DOHC VTEC Honda became so bad in the 90's and 2000's. I personally know a couple of Type-R's and GS-R's that got stolen more than once, stripped, rebuilt and then stolen again, etc.

Fourth, you seem to be reading a lot between the lines, that I don't believe is there. I had forgotten about Ron's Integra, but it is stretch to assume that everybody drove only Honda, since Wicked Racing was a lot of different people. He did say "his crew," but he didn't say they were all Honda. That said, when they started racing the CRX in the mid to late 90's the WORLD record was 11.2s when he ran an 11.9 with an engine that had everything thrown at it. So they were far from common.

Fifth, even to this day, the number of Honda cars that run these speeds/times is relatively rare. Certainly more common than they used to be, but you are unlikely to happen upon one on most days. Most of them are either bolt-on or very close to stock, and the ones that DO run that fast are pretty far and few between.

Also, keep in mind that in the late 90's a lot of people talked a big game, but couldn't really back it up. I have seen Civic "kids" tell me all about their B-Series swap and how fast it was when the engine was clearly a stock D-series (they just assumed nobody knew better). I even had a kid once tell me his alternator was his supercharger, and he then regaled me with a talel about how he fabricated it himself and did all the work etc. Unfortunately, this stuff plus the fad of fiberglass trash is what gave Honda enthusiasts the reputation as ricers.

Finally, as for your K series timeline and its time for development, don't forget that the L15T has been out since 2016, so it is a few more than 1 year into its development. The engine in the Si, is a CRV engine, and I would guess that as soon as some of these companies heard the same rumors Shawn did about the L15 going into the Si, they started looking at it. By this point in its development, the RSX-S had superchargers, turbochargers, cams, springs, pistons, rods, intake manifolds and all sorts of other stuff that was driving the performance as much as it is being driven today (if not more so). Also, like Shawn said, back then the majority of Hondas were dealing with NA, so of course they weren't getting the types of HP gains today's Hondas are with boosted engines. That said, they WERE on par for their day (until everyone else boosted and they were quickly eclipsed circa 2003-2004).

You can try to belittle my "real world experience" all you want, but the reality remains that the pace of development from 1996-2008ish was MUCH more rapid than anything being done in the Honda scene today. The demand just isn't there for them anymore. Too many options available for good money and they just don't stand out like they used to. Not a dig on anything other than wishing they would pull out the stops to get their performance credibility back.

As for your statements about the current Si, it would be a lot more fun, IMO, to be able to reflash a 100% stock engine and get to your ~300WHP and ~280WTQ and still have a ton of headroom left in the engine on pump gas. I just wouldn't trust an L15T running that kind of boost to hold together for me for well over 100K miles.

They upped the Si lease to $229, but when I looked last month, it was $209. Inventories must be getting lower finally. I would still expect to see a lot less supply next year.

Yes timelines do matter I agree. Your comment was based on our discussion about the RSX and 8th Si. I was the one who brought up the 90s because how inaccurate I felt that statement "pretty much NOTHING on the street was running 11s" when referring to cars of the early and mid 2000s. If you are softening pretty much nothing in ALL caps to mean "not many". Thats up to you. But I can only go off what you write not any amendments or " explanations" you try to add later. But if you were a part of the scene in the late 90s and 2000s you would know a statement like that is inaccurate. You asked me to find examples and I did for cars in the 90s and 2000s. You can pick apart whatever you want but you can easily google search more examples for yourself. When I think of pretty much NOTHING I think of close to nothing which is zero. So when I go to a track day in the 90s or 2000s I should see almost no cars running under 13s, hitting 12s and 11s and driving home after, but that just was not true. The issue published in in 2003 was to refute your initial claim of cars in the 2000s. Even if you were talking about B series cars new cars with those motors were being made in the early 2000s as well so it works either way. The article with Ron in the 90s he mentioned his whole crew being in the 11s. We never specified just Honda's initially you just threw that in. Even so, a lot of that explosion in tuning was due to Hondas so I'm sure there were a good amount sprinkled in.

I even found a documentary on the legal/iilegal drag racing scene in Toronto in the late 90s. They even showed track days with guys hitting low times like 12.1 in 98 and breaking in to 11s before the y2k. These were the same guys going to the coffee shop after and street racing the same cars they took to the track. Not to mention that Toronto was well behind the US in the import scene and our weather kept us from running all year. I used to go to these track days and there were dozens of people who blew money on builds like that.

In the 90s to mid 2000s you didn't have to be a mega Tuner to get times like I mentioned. You had to be invested for sure but guys were fabricating their own stuff and pulling stuff off with budgets in the 15k range like one of the articles stated.

Sure you may not "come across" one just driving through town but the Tuner crowd is a very small subset of the driving public. Doesn't mean a bunch of them are not out there. If I drive around and see pretty much NOTHING in terms of Type Rs, or heavily modded cars but then go to meet up and see hundreds of specials out there that doesn't equate to pretty much NOTHING. And if you ever went to track meets you wouldn't have to pretend you'd see them all for yourself. All these like minded people would congregate and I would see many cars running 11s and 12s then driving home after and that was far from pretty much NOTHING.

And again you prove my point. If leading edge is gunning for times as low as 7s in only 2003 that means cars that were 5 seconds slower were much easier to come by in the earlier 2000s. It's just progress. If you want the link to the documentary showing the Toronto scene at that time for another example of dailyed 12-11 second Honda's in a region trying to catch up with the explosion down south let me know, the quality is poor but it's there.

Again the timelines match up, there were more than "pretty much NOTHING" in terms of cars running 11s in the 90s and early 2000s. And even according to you people were chasing 7s while still in the early 2000s so that reinforces the fact that cars of that nature were not unicorns before that. 11 is still a decent time I think. So that's why I used it as an example of a car that had some decent work done to it. I never said cars at that pace were common in any era. Just not as scarce as your exposure to them or recollection of that time seems. I would upgrade your pretty much NOTHING to a decent amount.

Oh yeah and if you are talking about STOCK muscle cars in terms of street racing that is also confusing.
Domestics would have been doing the same thing the imports were doing as well, for much longer. So clearly a "decent amount" of these mustangs etc. That his crew were encountering were notably faster than stock. The imports would have to be fairly quick to take on modded v8s. Thats probably why he noted most of his crew was running in the 11s.

I never said the current pace is faster than the previous eras. Just noted that the build in the video was impressive and indicative of the progress that was made in a short time with a first factory boosted Si. And I also mentioned turbo gains would be easier than NA so you can reference me as well as Shawn.

Your opinions are noted on what you believe would be more fun. I'm glad a lot of people are enjoying themselves right now and there are tons of parts and support available for the L15B7 for those who want to see what they can do.

Yeah, not so much.

There is nothing inaccurate about my statements.

First, you showed me a car that didn't hit 12's until 2003. That is hardly "late 90's" which was MY original statement that you said was "inaccurate."

And you are right, timelines DO matter, which is why your trying to move the goal post 4-5 years into the future isn't going to stand.

You tried to assert that times "in the late 90's" were down in the 11's and there were numerous people running them, which there weren't (outside of fully built race cars, which don't count). So then, when provided information on times, you tried to show me a car that ran a 12 in 2003, which nearly half a decade outside of the 1990's. It was further exacerbated by the fact that you have subtly tried to pretend that moving the timeline somehow counts. I watched a documentary about Ed Bergenholtz and his effect on import drag racing in that era. They were all fighting for 11's. Considering he was the fastest clocked unibody Honda at that point, I find it hard to believe there were all of these legitimately verified 11 second Hondas running around then.

Your opinion on how "impressive" this engine is also noted. But notice that I didn't say a single thing about MY opinion of the engine, and mentioned strictly the structural concerns of pushing the engine to that power level reliably, so that is another straw man you are attempting to thread into the discussion that never occurred.

I don't like the engine in the Si and I have been more than vocal about that. In fact, I made the loudest statement I could by refusing to buy one, despite the fact I liked everything else about the car. But it has nothing to do with the validity of any statement I made in this thread.

As for how "impressive" the timeline for development is, if you were "in the scene" like you claim to be back then, then you KNOW this pace of development is not as fast as it was in Honda's hey day.

Further, how is the development of this "new" engine platform any more impressive than, say, something like the Focus ST? You keep talking about how impressive it is, but compared to its peers, I am just not seeing it.

P.S. 12's are not 11's and 11's are not 10's.

We were talking about RSX and Civic Si 8th gens when you made the comment about "pretty much NOTHING" was running 11s at that time. The RSX was out in the early 2000s and the 8th came out in 2006. I, ME, I was the one who made the comment about remembering a hatch in the 90s running 11s. You're actually the one who added the daily driven component too it as I never mentioned they had to be daily driven. Yet I kindly humoured your arbitrary requirements and still provided examples. So I gave you examples from the 90s and the time frame you were commenting on in the early to mid 2000s. There are many more examples out there of daily driven cars from the late 90s to early 2000s hitting 11s and driving home after. So saying pretty much NOTHING is still extremely inaccurate of the time. If you want me to copy and paste our exchange so you can remember what time frame you were talking about before I brought up the 90s I can do that as well. I don't know what you have against all the progress people made in the 90s and 2000s is but they were doing it big back then. It doesn't have to be a ton of cars in the 11s to make your statements wrong. Just more than pretty much NOTHING. And there were more than that for sure. So pretty much NOTHING running 11s and driving home in the 90s and 2000s you are still incorrect. I'm sure others here have experience with cars like that as well.

If you don't find the progress made on the motor impressive that is up to you. Everyone has an opinion. I wasn't comparing it to any other rate of progress personally, I was just thinking of the timeframe these parts and cars are coming out, and all the support I'm seeing. As a car guy seeing what tuners are doing with such a tiny, economy based motor is very interesting. There are some great builds out there so far like this one. Not everyone will appreciate the progress that has been made tho and that's fine.

The new Si benefits plenty compared to 10 years ago thanks to general improvements in technology that all cars have implemented. The suspension (particularly the shocks), chassis stiffness, etc. That's why new cars are better than old ones generally, with the likelihood of being better going up as the difference in age gets larger.

And we are talking a factory turbo car vs. a naturally aspirated car. The former will always return bigger gains for the initial investment in modifications.

That said, when you look at powertrain potential, the 1.5T Si has some fundamental limitations where it hits a wall that will raise costs considerably.

1) The internal structure. While this engine was designed for turbocharging, and can run reliably for quite some time at 300 whp, it is also, at heart, an economy engine. That means it has very light components, small bearings, a long stroke and narrow bore. Once you get over 400 lbs-ft of torque you're getting into some very high cylinder loadings. Compared to a K20, the L15T will need 33% more cylinder pressure to generate the same torque, and you're asking much smaller rods and bearings to handle it.

2) The fueling system. The bane of all DI systems these days are the limitations of the DI pump. There are a few aftermarket upgrades available for some cars, but they are generally mildly tweaked versions of factory pumps rather than high output replacements. A new company, XtremeDI, founded by an ex-Bosch employee is looking to change this (has already demonstrated pumps on the new CTR, the GM LT4 Z06 engine and others) by offering true high output replacements. But they are expensive and require substantial ecu retuning to make work.

For the L15T I don't forsee any true high output pumps coming soon, simply because it isn't a high performance engine family. Eventually that may change, but even if you build and upgrade the turbo on the Civic Si, the fuel system will still put a limit on you at around 400 whp on E85.

By comparison, the old K20 was capped out around 250 whp with all the bolt-ons if you stayed NA. Compared the the 260-270 whp you get just with a tune, dp and exhaust on the 1.5T, the latter looks like a great deal.

However, the stock K20 can reliably handle a boosted 400 whp on pump gas, and 500+ whp on E85 (the F20C can handle 600-700 whp on E85 on a completely stock motor as another reference point). A lot of this strength is because these engines were designed to handle 9000 rpm without breaking, which means you have to have quite strong rods and durable bearings. The pistons won't handle detonation (hence, e85) and the ring gaps are too tight to risk letting heat get out of hand, but the fundamental strength is there. Combined with the great cylinder head and high revving ability, you only need 350 lbs-ft of torque at the wheels to to make over 500 whp. That means cylinder pressures are quite low compared to the 350-400 lbs-ft necessary just to get 350 whp on the L15T. So you reduce cylinder pressure while having beefier components to handle it.

Certainly if you're happy with 300 whp, the new Civic Si is the easy winner. And the vast majority of owners will be quite happy with a $2k investment on a $24k car to get that. But once you have to start replacing turbos and fuel systems, the older motor starts to look more attractive (a $200 fuel pump and $500 set of injectors is all you need to support upwards of 500 whp on a K20 - the 1.5T will cost a lot more in that regard). Its simply that, because it was designed as an economy engine, the available headroom on the 1.5T is lower. That's why you won't see the 1.5T developing the long term following the K20 has. OTOH, the K20 turbo in the CTR (and Accord) has a helluva lot more headroom and if there are enough of those engines available, they will be quite popular.

SC

This was well put and informative. I also thought Owes claim that NA K20s were passing 300whp to be pretty optimistic. The 250hp range seems more accurate for most higher end builds. I'm sure there are some extreme examples out there but I would differ to your experience with the motor there.

Even though I don't see anyone disputing the inherit limitations of the L15s this is valuable info for people curious for more details about the pros and cons of working with this type of motor.

Have you had a chance to check out the build in this video? These guys have done great work with past set ups so I figured some people would like what they saw here. A valid concern owe brought up was durability/longevity like you touched on. But the pump/fuel system is something I've seen discussed rarely and I believe that is a very notable issue to highlight that may not get resolved for high hp builds for the time being.

As I mentioned PRL has been running a 400+ hp Si for some time now but I would have to assume they put in better rods and did other internal work with that engine. They themselves note that it is very early in their testing so they will need more time to gauge durability as the configuration of the motor is new.

Like you, I anticipate the k20ts to be quite the darlings in the aftermarket. They already are, and support is just growing. But again, the support I've seen so far and examples like this video are examples of pretty good showings so far for this economy motor. As you say, depending on your goals this config could make some peeps pretty satisfied.

Another attempt at an insult. The problem is that my "estimates" weren't optimistic.

Shawn said max for a K20. Not 2.0L. As soon as the K series came, the K24 was right behind it and a K24 with a K20DOHC VTEC head and bolt ons will, in fact, hit 300WHP.

I was making a generalized K-series statement and you are incorrectly attributing it to strictly a K20 statement.

By this point in the 8th gen's run, the engines were passing 300WHP NA

That is a cut and paste of your statement. No attempt at insults on my part because I still feel this notion was optimistic. You were specifically calling out the 8th Gen and saying the engines were passing 300whp. That does not look like a general k series statement. You can add on to and reinterpret your own comments all you want but that reads only as a specific reference to 8th Gen Si motors. I'm going by what you typed and nothing else. I can't go by what you add on and make up after you get called out because that would take forever.

Once again:

"By this point in the 8th gen's run, the engines were passing 300WHP NA"

This statement, specifically as you wrote it, regardless of your attempts to modify the meaning of this plain language, is optimistic to me.

K24 block + K20 head holmes. Don't try and read between the lines because you are incorrect. The K20 topped out at ~260WHP. The extra displacement of the K24 did, in fact, go to and above 300WHP in this era. The K24 had been around for quite some time at this point, and it was quite popular for guys to buy a K24 with DOHC VTEC head, or a cheaper K24 without DOHC VTEC and swap the Si head onto it. It was at least as common as the Type-R turbo swap is on this example Si. It is a trick that was used up until the 9th gen with K24 was retired as that one had a huge bottleneck on the exhaust side and the easiest way to remedy it was to put a K20Z3 head onto the car and use a header. That isn't a recent invention and I have seen them in 8th gen's, 9th gen's, and any manner of chassis that was K swapped.

Also by that point in the 8th gen's run, the boosted engines were clearing 400-500WHP.

So again, you are wrong. I did, in fact, (as directly referenced by your quote) make a generalized K series statement. There was no specific mention of K20 in my statement.